Classworks Adds IEP Goals, Objectives, and Easy Tracking to CASE-Endorsed Platform

Classworks Adds IEP Goals, Objectives, and Easy Tracking to CASE-Endorsed Platform

Classworks, a Special Education solution endorsed by the Council of Administrators of Special Education (CASE), added new IEP goal writing and progress monitoring features to their award-winning intervention and  Special Education platform. 

Classworks now facilitates creating, writing, and achieving academic IEP goals for reading and mathematics.

Enhancements include:

  -Domain-specific Present Levels of Performance data for each student

  -Suggested standards for IEP Goals based on assessment data

  -Suggested standards and skill-based short-term objectives to support the IEP

  -Skill-based Progress Monitoring to track progress on the exact objectives chosen for the IEP

  -Copy and paste PLAAFP goal and objectives data into any IEP tool

“Our special education teachers are dedicated to creating high-quality IEPs customized to each student’s areas of need. However, that process can be cumbersome without the right data and tools. Classworks data is easy to understand and gives us exactly what we need to create meaningful goals. Plus, the progress monitoring being automatically tied to the objectives is a game changer for us,” states Katrina Jackson, director of special education, Montgomery Public Schools. “Teachers are thrilled that they have reliable data and documentation. Classworks has cut their IEP writing time in half!” 

How it Works

The comprehensive SPED solution has always included reading and math assessments validated by the  National Center on Intensive Intervention (NCII) to identify present levels of performance by domain. Now teachers can easily add PLOP/PLAAFP statements, along with goals and objectives, right into their IEP tool. 

Teachers select from suggested standards-based grade-level IEP goals based on each student’s area of need. Additionally, Classworks provides a bank of objectives at the student’s present level that align to the selected grade level standard. The objectives are already included in the student’s Progress Monitoring to seamlessly measure progress toward the goal.  

“Classworks’ NCII-validated Progress Monitoring has long been a beloved solution for teachers due to its ease of use and automatic rate of improvement graphing,”  said Jerry Henley, senior vice president of product experience at Classworks. “We heard from our district partners about the need for consistency of data and easier tracking of progress towards goals. It made sense to tie progress monitoring data to chosen objectives automatically, giving teachers the confidence that they have reliable documentation.”

Specially-Designed Instruction

The program takes it a step further by delivering individualized specially-designed reading and math instruction to each student based on their screening and progress monitoring data. Students are working on exactly what the IEP has identified and their learning path is automatically adapted based on their weekly data.  

“Often special educators are using programs bought for them by gen ed that don’t meet their very specific need for streamlined data that connects present levels to measurable goals and objectives and consistently tracks progress,” explains Melissa Sinunu, Classworks president and COO. “We worked with our district partners to ensure the new features meet their need to create effective academic IEPs, measure and document progress, and deliver individualized SDI to achieve goals!”

Learn more about  Classworks for Special Education.

About Classworks

Classworks leverages technology and evidence-based learning practices to transform how school districts support students’ academic, social-emotional, and behavioral needs. Our CASE-endorsed, comprehensive Special Education solution includes academic screeners, math and reading specially-designed instruction, progress monitoring, suggested IEP goals and objectives, and powerful data visualizations. Classworks screener and progress monitoring assessments are validated by the National Center of Intensive Intervention (NCII).

eSchool News Staff
Latest posts by eSchool News Staff (see all)

Source link

6 ways to help reluctant readers become booklovers

6 ways to help reluctant readers become booklovers

Not everyone loves to read. Even in schools with strong reading cultures, some students just don’t feel the spark—yet.

Through helping reluctant readers find books that capture their imaginations, teachers and librarians can ignite a newfound enthusiasm for reading in students.

Here are six strategies for engaging hesitant students:

1. Hand it to them. Nothing beats putting books in the hands of reluctant readers—it’s the number one way to generate interest. But you must put the right books in the right hands. As part of our reader’s advisory services, we do lots of one-on-one conversations, learning what a student likes to do outside of school, or what movies, tv shows or video games they enjoy.

While some students love browsing the library for a great new read, others are intimidated by the sheer number of books and may be reluctant to ask for help. Those students likely won’t be motivated by learning how to use the catalog—and sometimes, it’s better to hand them a book by engaging authors like Nic Stone or Jason Reynolds.

2. Share your enthusiasm. An avid reader can sell a book to anybody. Encourage your own community of booklovers to share their reading finds with students. For example, create bulletin boards highlighting your students’ favorite books or even your own favorite reads. Doing so might help your students discover their next favorite book!

3. Teach them how to judge a book by its cover. Many students don’t know how to browse for books of interest. One of the most effective activities I do in my library is called “Five-Minute Mania”—a readers’ version of speed dating. I scatter brand-new books by diverse authors across the library tables and ask each student to pick up whatever one looks most interesting. They choose based solely on the cover—whether it’s the color, size, picture or typeface that attracts them. Students then spend one minute perusing the book’s front, spine and back cover. Next, they read the inside flaps of the dust jacket (including the author bio) and flip through pages. Finally, they take a test drive, reading as far as they can in three minutes. If that reading experience felt like the longest three minutes ever, the book’s a pass. If they hated to put it down, it’s a keeper.

Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

Source link

6 ways to help reluctant readers become booklovers

How to evaluate literacy programs that pledge to accelerate learning

The NAEP results in late 2022 revealed that reading scores fell for both fourth and eighth grade readers as a result of the pandemic. Only 33 percent of fourth graders are reading proficiently, which means that two-thirds read below grade level. For eighth graders, the scores are even lower with only 31 percent reading proficiently, and more than two-thirds reading below grade level.

While instruction informed by reading science is necessary for all students, it is essential for students who are at risk for reading challenges due to dyslexia, developmental language disorder, or other factors. Teachers need real-time progress monitoring data, data-driven action plans, and instructional tools that allow them to deliver the right instruction either inside or outside the classroom.

Schools and districts want to know the literacy program they choose is firmly grounded in the science of reading (i.e., more than 50 years of research) and has proven itself in real classrooms. Whether a literacy company has been in the market for 60 years or 60 days, there are ways to fact-check its solutions to determine if its research is valid, there is proven efficacy, and it can fulfill the promises they make to teachers and students. For district leaders, it is critical to understand the importance of the science of reading and the role of Structured Literacy as they review available literacy solutions.

The Science of Reading and Structured Literacy

Teaching reading is a complex process that incorporates decades of research into how students learn and how reading should be taught. Educators understand that teaching students to read fluently is the key to their overall academic success.

Almost every literacy program claims its solution is based on the science of reading, and some also claim its program follows a Structured Literacy instructional model. What does that mean, exactly? These terms are not synonymous. The science of reading is the evidence. It is 50+ years of gold-standard research about what works in reading instruction and the skills necessary to read proficiently.

Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

Source link

Surveys on Free Expression on Campus Have Zeroed In on a Common Worry. It’s Not Professors.

When Ray Rodrigues, a longtime Republican lawmaker in Florida, sponsored legislation to conduct an annual intellectual-diversity survey of public-university students and staff members across the state, he expressed a common refrain among those in his party. “We have a responsibility to teach students how to think for themselves rather than indoctrinating them on what to think,” Rodrigues, now chancellor of the state’s public-university system, said in June 2021. “Without a measurement of intellectual diversity, it is impossible to know if Florida taxpayers are providing an education or an indoctrination.”

The Florida effort became the second major institution-specific survey of free expression on college campuses, joining a project in the University of North Carolina system that began in 2019. Next to arrive on the scene was the University of Wisconsin, which released results from its own survey in January. On Wednesday a national survey from Heterodox Academy, a nonprofit membership organization that promotes viewpoint diversity in higher education, became the latest piece of research to shed light on the state of campus discourse, which is typically the stuff of newsmaking incidents or opinion pieces. The results of the surveys are consistent. Contrary to the fears expressed by Rodrigues, which implicitly affix blame to a liberal professoriate, students are more concerned with their peers’ judgment than with their professors’.

In other words, experts say, the surveys don’t necessarily reveal a worsening crisis of free expression. Rather, they could be evidence of a phenomenon that has long existed on college campuses: Students are working to figure out what they think and why, and how to talk through tough subjects. The findings may not be surprising in the context of student-development research; they’ve acquired a politicized valence only in this sharply partisan time.

Still, the topline data are head-turning: 58.5 percent of students surveyed by Heterodox reported being reluctant to discuss at least one of five controversial topics they were asked about — gender, politics, race, religion, and sexual orientation.

The Wisconsin survey, which moved forward in the fall after months of controversy, identified a source of reluctance similar to the one observed by Heterodox: When students hesitate to share their views, it’s most often because they fear negative consequences from their peers. (Nearly two-thirds of respondents to the Heterodox survey said the top reason for being reluctant to express their opinions in class was concern that “other students would make critical comments with each other after class.”)

The North Carolina results also found that students were more concerned about their fellow students’ opinions than about those of their instructors. The survey additionally showed that faculty members weren’t pushing political agendas in class and that most students didn’t significantly change their political views throughout college. (It’s more difficult to draw conclusions from the Florida survey, given its 2.4-percent response rate among students, but a majority of respondents there agreed that their campus fostered free expression.)

The results across surveys comport with decades of research on young-adult development, said Julie J. Park, an associate professor of education at the University of Maryland at College Park.

“I didn’t see this overriding impression that students seem closed off to each other, to new ideas, to even disagreeing outwardly,” Park said of the Wisconsin results. “I thought the picture was more complex,” she added, “than some soundbites that I think people might try to run with if they decide to interpret the data in a certain way.”

Take, for example, the finding that more than half of Wisconsin students choose not to express their views on controversial topics in class. At first glance it’s an eye-popping statistic, until you consider, Park said, that their reasons for doing so were often anodyne. Of the top five reasons students reported for not sharing their thoughts on touchy subjects, two related to fears about how their peers would perceive them. The other three were more mundane: not feeling they knew enough about the topic, not wanting to share about their identity or experiences, and a simple tendency to stay quiet in class, no matter the subject.

The top five reasons students gave in open-ended comments in the Heterodox survey for hesitating to share their opinions on controversial subjects were remarkably similar: fear of negative social consequences from peers, a general dislike of conflict or debate, a lack of knowledge on the subject, a desire not to upset or offend others, and general shyness about speaking up in class.

A reluctance to share views on controversial topics because of a lack of knowledge could be seen as an expression of intellectual restraint and maturity, Park said. “That’s a good reason to take a step back and think, ‘Oh, maybe I want to learn more about this before I share just what I think off the top of my head,’” she said.

It also aligns with the process of self-discovery that’s traditionally associated with college, said Rosemary J. Perez, an associate professor of higher education at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor. Students are often trying to discern and articulate their own views, independent of the ones they were exposed to growing up, through family, friends, school, church, or other environments. They may not feel as passionately about some hot-button topics as their peers do, which only adds to their skittishness about speaking up, she said. And, particularly in the early years of college, some students are highly attuned to peers’ opinions when forming their sense of self.

The emotional resonance of that dynamic has been heightened in the current partisan climate, said Amy J. Binder, a professor of sociology at the University of California at San Diego. “There is just this expectation in the last eight or so years that you fall on one side or the other, and you’re supposed to have an opinion, and if you don’t have an opinion, then just shut up,” she said. “So much of this just has to do with the polarization of our political times.”

In Wisconsin, while nearly two-thirds of students reported being concerned about their peers’ opinions and about whether they knew enough about the topic, smaller percentages feared that their instructors would dismiss their views as offensive or that they’d get lower grades — 46 and 41 percent, respectively. “That is much more about peer interactions and developmental stage and what they see as peer pressure,” Binder said. “That’s really different from top-down indoctrination.”

Students’ preoccupation with their peers’ opinions is also not surprising, said Park and Perez, because young people prioritize belonging — particularly on a campus and in a community unknown to them. Without knowing what the people around them think, Perez said, students might hold back their own opinions in the interest of making friends, or at least not unwittingly making enemies.

For students, the consequences of making a wrong impression with peers can be much worse than with professors. If students have a bad experience in a certain class, Perez pointed out, they can simply avoid taking that instructor’s courses in the future. But they’re much more likely to run into their fellow students again — in other classes, in the cafeteria or the dorm, at student-organization meetings or out on weekends. No wonder, then, that they’d be more concerned about their peers’ opinions.

While such concerns may be understandable, they may also be overblown. The Heterodox survey found that students overestimate their peers’ negative reactions to their views by about three times; two-thirds of students, when asked what they’d do if another student expressed a different viewpoint than their own, said they’d ask questions to better understand their peer, while just 15.6 percent said they’d “speak out to criticize them as being offensive” and 21.7 percent said they would stay quiet during class but “make critical comments after.”

Those numbers should be taken with a grain of salt, since people completing a self-reported survey are likely to view their own behavior more positively than others’, said Nicole Barbaro, Heterodox’s director of communications and a co-author of a report on the findings. Still, she said, students’ outsize fear of their peers’ judgment “seems like a larger campus and academic-culture issue that we need to address.”

Such fear could be a product of the perceived risk of speaking up — for example, that a clumsily phrased remark or question in class could wind up going viral. “Students are rightly fearful in today’s climate, where things are quickly labeled as offensive,” Barbaro said. “They’re rightly a little bit nervous and self-conscious to say something, when it should be a space, in the classroom, for them to be practicing in a lower-risk environment.”

Some of the surveys’ findings do reinforce conservatives’ concerns that campuses are inhospitable places for their views. For example, self-identified Democrats were least reluctant to discuss four of the five controversial topics the Heterodox survey examined, while Republican students were most reluctant to hold forth on race, gender, and sexual orientation.

And in Wisconsin, just 34.6 percent of students who identified as very conservative said instructors “often” or “extremely often” encourage students to explore a wide variety of viewpoints; more than double that share of very liberal students — 73.8 percent — said the same. Conservative students were also significantly more likely than their liberal counterparts to report having felt pressured by an instructor to agree with a particular opinion — 91.3 percent of self-identified conservative and very conservative students reported as much, as opposed to 30.5 percent of their liberal counterparts. And conservatives were less likely than their liberal peers to feel comfortable speaking up on hot-button topics like transgender issues and abortion.

Asking administrators to intercede against troubling speech was more common among liberal students than conservative ones. Liberal students in Wisconsin were much more likely to favor administrators’ banning the expression of harmful views and to advocate for disinviting controversial speakers — 40.9 and 58 percent of liberal or very liberal students, respectively, favored disinviting speakers from campus if some found their message offensive, while only a quarter of moderates, 13 percent of somewhat conservative students, and 9 percent of very conservative students said they’d do so.

But there’s also nuance that those numbers can’t capture. In her interview-based research, Binder has found progressive students to be more ambivalent on the matter, often making what she described as “contradictory back-and-forth comments about administrators’ responsibility to protect vulnerable students.” A student might start a conversation with Binder by stating adamantly that administrators should ban controversial speakers, she explained. “Then we’d say, ‘Really? There’s no place for that person to speak on campus?’” The student might then backtrack and suggest that perhaps instead of banning a speaker, a university leader should make a statement about how the speaker “is not in keeping with the principles of community on our campus.” In general, Binder said, progressive students in her research hesitate to give definitive answers on whether speakers should be banned.

Self-identified liberal and very liberal Wisconsin students were somewhat less likely to say their instructors should remove a reading or an assignment or stop discussing a topic in class if some students felt they included harmful views than the liberals were to say administrators should bar speakers from campus. Binder said that suggests students are more trusting of their professors than of administrators, which her research indicated was true of students across political lines.

“There’s this national conversation about how higher education is enemy No. 1 in the culture wars,” Binder said, “but when students are actually in professors’ classrooms, it’s hard to really keep up that discourse because the professors are treating them with respect.”

Students in the Heterodox survey identified a larger, and increasing, source of concern about where self-censorship occurs — on the campus itself. Just over 63 percent of respondents somewhat or strongly agreed that the climate on their campus prevents people from saying things they believe because others might find those views offensive, marking a nearly 10-point growth since 2019 and 2020 in the percentage of students who said so.

That’s puzzling, the Heterodox report points out, because “there are frequent top-down reminders from institutions for students to consider varying perspectives,” but such administrative messaging doesn’t penetrate students’ perceptions of campus climate.

One possible explanation for the disconnection might be seen in Binder’s research, which finds that administrators are perceived by conservative students as “always falling on the side of progressive issues,” particularly as they send out community emails about topics like police shootings, global warming, and anti-Asian hate. “It’s easier to characterize them as hopelessly, consistently on the side of progressive issues, whereas if you have more face-to-face time with people, i.e. your professors, then you don’t have that same sense of it all being the same,” she said. For their part, Binder added, liberals are often skeptical of what they see as administrators’ “lip service” to tough topics.

Absent that nuance, Binder said, “I think it would be a mistake to just say, ‘See, here’s the smoking gun; all of university life is tilted against conservatives.’”

At least one Republican legislator sees cause for action in the University of Wisconsin survey results: State Rep. Dave Murphy, chair of the Wisconsin Assembly’s Committee on Colleges and Universities, who advocated for the survey from the start. “I sometimes think that you hear anecdotal complaints, that maybe they’re exaggerated a bit,” Murphy told The Chronicle last month. “The survey kind of tells me now that they probably weren’t exaggerated at all.”

Murphy said he planned to hold several hearings on the survey, from now to the summer. He also plans to introduce a bill, similar to one he proposed in 2022, that would block universities and technical colleges from enforcing time, place, or other restrictions on free-speech events anywhere on campus except classrooms. While Murphy doesn’t see the survey results as a means to justify cuts to the university, he said earmarking some money with “some strings attached” was a possibility.

“I have no particular inclination or need, necessarily, to tell the university what to do or how to run itself. I would prefer to give them solid information, back it up, have hearings on it, bring in experts to talk about what the surveys are telling us, and then let the Board of Regents act accordingly,” Murphy said. “There might be some legislation that we might be able to put together that would hold their feet to the fire a bit more.”

One antidote to the problem of self-censorship comes from the Heterodox survey: Respondents who reported high levels of interaction with their peers were less likely to self-censor and more likely to share their views in class — at least 10 percentage points more likely, in fact, across five controversial topics — than were those who had lower levels of peer interaction. (That’s not entirely a function of in-person versus virtual instruction, the Heterodox report notes; while in-person learning was more conducive to high peer interaction, “it does not imply that online learning was driving students’ reluctance to share their views in the classroom.”)

It stands to reason, then, that “if the legislature is going to think about something, maybe they should think about just investing more money generally in teaching and learning,” said Park, the Maryland professor. That could mean bringing in more instructors to facilitate small-group discussions, given that many students probably don’t feel comfortable speaking up in a lecture hall with hundreds of their peers. She and Perez suggested intergroup dialogue programs, already prominent at both of their home institutions, as another possible remedy. Ensuring that students, even if they’re in a large lecture hall, have at least one opportunity per class session to engage with one another could go a long way toward improving the situation, Barbaro said.

In other words, the most effective way to alleviate fears about indoctrination might be to rely more, not less, on professors to skillfully guide discussions of fraught topics — and to give them the resources to do so.

Source link

Public-University President Faces Backlash for Canceling Student Group's Drag Show

A public-university president in Texas has drawn fierce criticism and accusations of censorship for canceling a student organization’s planned drag show because he found it offensive.

Walter Wendler, president of West Texas A&M University, made the announcement in a strongly worded email to the campus community on Monday with the subject line “A Harmless Drag Show? No Such Thing.” In the message, Wendler described drag shows as “derisive, divisive, and demoralizing misogyny” and said he doesn’t think such events “preserve a single thread of human dignity.”

Wendler’s decision and justification have drawn criticism from First Amendment lawyers and others who say students at a public college have a legal right to perform in drag and attend the event. Students plan to hold protests on campus throughout this week. An online petition calling for the university to reinstate the drag performance has over 4,000 signatures as of Tuesday afternoon.

The now-canceled event, called “A Fool’s Drag Race,” was scheduled to feature student drag performers from across the campus “stomping it out to see who’s the fiercest of them all.” It was organized by student groups, including the gay-straight alliance at West Texas A&M. Proceeds and tips were to benefit the Trevor Project, a suicide-prevention organization for LGBTQ youth.

Drag events feature performers who typically dress in the clothes of a different gender and embrace an alternate identity. They include both men dressing as women, called drag queens, and women dressing as men, called drag kings. Proponents say they are important LGBTQ traditions that promote queer self-expression and gender experimentation.

However, Wendler feels differently about drag, according to his email. He wrote that his views were informed by his Christian faith.

“As a performance exaggerating aspects of womanhood (sexuality, femininity, gender), drag shows stereotype women in cartoon-like extremes for the amusement of others and discriminate against womanhood,” Wendler wrote. “Any event which diminishes an individual or group through such representation is wrong.”

Wendler then compared drag shows to “‘blackface performances’” and to a previous instance of racial harassment on campus, and said he would oppose any event that “denigrates others.”

Students’ online petition criticized Wendler’s understanding of drag and his comparisons.

“Not only is this a gross and abhorrent comparison of two completely different topics, but it is also an extremely distorted and incorrect definition of drag as a culture and form of performance art,” the petition states.

A spokesperson for West Texas A&M declined to comment on Wendler’s email.

Sam Burnett, president of the Amarillo Area Transgender Advocacy Group, said in an interview that Wendler’s statement is a “disgrace.”

“Drag is really just a performance of art,” Burnett said. “Drag has been around since the 17 and 1800s. When you think about it, performances of art back then, women did not perform in art. So the men wore dresses and they dressed in drag, and today’s no different.”

Burnett said most critics of drag — many of whom are conservative politicians claiming that the growing popularity of drag leads to “gender indoctrination” — should take time to understand what drag is and how complex it is. Burnett said the kind of drag performance the students intended to host was appropriate for an educational setting.

“There’s some raunchy performances in a bar because that’s a place for it, right? Just like there are strip clubs,” he said. “But those same strippers aren’t gonna put a performance on at the park. The performances that are going to happen at the parks and things like that are educational. They’re rated G.”

Regardless of Wendler’s personal beliefs about drag, legal experts said that the president’s decision likely ran afoul of the First Amendment, as well as other laws and policies that protect students’ rights.

Kristen Shahverdian, senior manager of free expression and education at PEN America, a nonprofit dedicated to protecting free expression, called the cancellation “an abhorrent trampling of students’ free-expression rights” and said it goes against university policy and expression norms on campus.

“Drag shows are an art form that deserve protection on campus like any other, and the idea that a university president would cancel this event based on his own political views makes this precisely the kind of action the First Amendment is meant to protect against,” Shahverdian said.

Wendler acknowledged legal implications in his email, but he said he wouldn’t support certain kinds of expression “even if told the performance is a form of free speech.”

“I will not appear to condone the diminishment of any group at the expense of impertinent gestures toward another group for any reason, even when the law of the land appears to require it,” Wendler wrote.

That statement surprised Alex Morey, director of campus rights advocacy at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. Wendler’s stance openly violates the rights of student performers, event hosts, and others on campus who might want to attend the show, Morey said.

It’s a “very unusual situation to have the president of a public university openly say that not only are they aware of their legal obligations, but they don’t care about them and plan to violate them anyway,” Morey said.

Source link

Classworks Adds IEP Goals, Objectives, and Easy Tracking to CASE-Endorsed Platform

Association of Latino Administrators and Superintendents (ALAS) Partners with Scholastic to Create Latino-inspired Book Collection

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Association of Latino Administrators and Superintendents (ALAS) partnered with Scholastic to help them develop “ Rising Voices: Elevating Latino Stories,” a new collection of books for grades K-5 which showcases positive images of Latino protagonists.

ALAS Executive Director Dr. Maria Armstrong, along with author Sulma Arzu-Brown and Emmy-award-winning actor and producer John Leguizamo, serve as mentors for the project, providing insight and guidance during the development of the collection.

“Representation matters, and many students of color simply don’t see themselves in most traditional classroom texts. That is a disservice for both those students, and for their classmates,” said Dr. Armstrong. “This collection helps address this issue and supports teachers in creating inclusive classrooms where stories are discussed and embraced and where students learn about each other’s culture and heritage. It is the mission of our organization to support the education and sense of belonging for all students and in particular for Latino students and students of color. Helping one of the world’s largest book publishers create inclusive learning and teaching materials is one way we can do this.”

The collection features a mix of authentic fiction and nonfiction texts celebrating the accomplishments and potential of Latinos. It also includes instructional materials and digital resources to help teachers build literacy skills and social-emotional awareness.

“Here at Hartford Public Schools, 55% of our student population, and 20% of our staff, identify as Hispanic or Latino. Therefore, it is of critical importance to us that our students see positive images of diverse Latino figures and that our teachers have the instructional materials and resources to provide insight into those experiences and stories,” said Hartford Public Schools Superintendent Dr. Leslie Torres-Rodriguez, whose district recently purchased the collection. “This collection will ensure equitable access to resources that will allow all of our students, staff, and families to celebrate themselves and others through the Latino stories and voices captured within these text sets and instructional materials.”

The collection provides students with high-interest culturally-relevant texts that give insight into what they’re experiencing in the world around them and helps to build a rich classroom community where students can grow as leaders and thinkers. Each grade-level library includes 25 titles (2 copies of each), teaching cards, a teacher’s guide, access to Scholastic’s digital resource website, storage bins, and labeling stickers.

For more information visit:

For more information about ALAS, visit .

About the Association of Latino Administrators & Superintendents (ALAS)

The Association of Latino Administrators and Superintendents [ALAS] is committed to providing a perspective to all aspiring school and district administrators including superintendents through programs, services, advocacy and networks rooted in Latino experiences and culture. ALAS has nearly 8,000 members across 23 state affiliates with several more states soon to be a part of the ALAS Familia. Our Vision, Mission and Goals are to provide leadership at the national level that assures every school in America effectively serves the educational needs of all students with an emphasis on Latino and other historically marginalized youth through continuous professional learning, policy advocacy, and networking to share practices of promise for our students and the communities where we serve.

By the year 2026, Latino children will make up 30 percent of the school-age population. In the nation’s largest states – California, Texas, Florida, and New York- all of whom are ALAS State Affiliates– Latinos already have reached that level. It is of vital interest to invest in the education of every child, and the professional learning of all educators who serve Latino youth.

eSchool News Staff
Latest posts by eSchool News Staff (see all)

Source link