Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

General Reading First Questions:
1. How well are America’s children reading? [click here]

America’s children are not reading well enough. Educators, parents and other interested parties have long acknowledged the general deterioration of our students’ overall reading achievements. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) provides perhaps the best single glimpse into the nationwide problem. From NAEP, we get a basic picture of how well children read, and the picture is not encouraging. Approximately 40% of students across the nation cannot read at a basic level. And as disconcerting as this general situation is, specific sub-groups of students are experiencing even less success.

  • Almost 70% of low-income fourth grade students cannot read at a basic level.
  • Almost half the students living in urban areas cannot read at a basic level.
  • Average-performing students have made no progress over the last 10 years, and the lowest-performing readers have become less successful over this same time period.

2. What’s the key to turning the situation around? [click here]

Encouraging, these trends in reading failure can be broken. Schools and districts can and have overcome failure and made excellent progress with even the most difficult-to-educate children. Unfortunately, these islands of excellence are too few and far between. Yet we know that every single child – regardless of income level or home environment – can and must learn to read by the end of the third grade; thus, it is reading instruction from kindergarten through third grade where significant new federal support for states and districts is being focused.

Research has consistently identified the critical skills that young students need to become good readers. Teachers across different states and districts have demonstrated that sound, scientifically based reading instruction can and does work with all children. The critical missing piece lies in helping able teachers benefit from the relevant research in each and every classroom. Real nationwide progress can be made when we bring together proven methods with significant new federal resources to make sure that every child becomes a successful reader, and that each child moves forward well-prepared for a rich and rewarding academic experience.

3. What is being done to help children read well by the third grade? [click here]

America’s reading problem is serious, but there are good reasons to be optimistic about the future.

First, improving the reading skills of children is a top national and state priority. The President, the First Lady, the Secretary of Education, governors, business leaders, elected officials, citizens, community organizations, parents and teachers are deeply committed to doing whatever it takes to ensure that every child can read. This is just the type of deep commitment and collegial cooperation that will be needed to best address this challenge.

Second, researchers and educators have come to a constructive consensus about reading instruction and the critical skills children must learn to be successful readers. Particularly at this point in history, science has provided tremendous insight into exactly how children learn to read, and related research has identified the most essential components of reading instruction.

Lastly, grassroots efforts to focus on this problem are springing up across the nation. Local schools, districts and state educational agencies have already started to improve reading instruction. Significant new federal funds and support are being made available to support, enhance and expand these state and local efforts.


4. What’s different about Reading First? [click here]

Reading First, unlike previous national reading programs, is a classroom-focused nationwide effort designed to help each and every student become a successful leader. Every state is eligible to apply, and the most needy schools and districts will receive funds and other support they will need to succeed.

Second, the size and scope of the program are much larger than previous programs. We cannot acknowledge the depth of the problem without making available the support and expertise required to ensure reading success for all students.

Moreover, Reading First differs from earlier initiatives by establishing clear, specific expectations for what can and should happen for all students. Reading First specifies that teachers’ classroom instructional decisions must be informed by scientifically based reading research. Through Reading First, students are systematically and explicitly taught five key early reading skills:

  • Phonemic Awareness – The understanding that individual sounds of spoken language (phonemes) work together to make words. This allows readers to hear, identify and manipulate the individual sounds.
  • Phonics – The relationship between the sounds of spoken language (phonemes) and the letters representing those sounds in written language (graphemes). Skill in phonics helps students to recognize familiar words and decode unfamiliar ones.
  • Vocabulary – The ability to store information about the meaning and pronunciation of words. There are four types of vocabulary: listening, speaking, reading and writing.
  • Fluency – The skill of reading texts accurately and quickly which allows readers to recognize and comprehend words at the same time.
  • Reading Comprehension – Understanding, remembering and communicating with others about what had been read. Comprehension strategies help readers to make sense of a text.

Reading First appropriately concentrates attention on the classroom. Classroom instruction time should reflect the most accurate and up-to-date knowledge about the science of teaching children how to read. For that reason, Reading First provides funds to state and local districts to help classroom teachers improve the reading instruction they deliver to all of their children.

5. Does this mean there is only one good way to teach early reading? [click here]

No, there are a variety of successful methods to teach early reading, but they share a common understanding of and commitment to the five key skills outlined above. There are better ways – and worse ways – to perform most sophisticated, multi-faceted tasks, and teaching reading is no different. But teaching reading is too important and too complex not to equip our teachers with the best methods and best training for their crucial task.

Reading First appropriately concentrates attention on the classroom. Classroom instruction time should reflect the most accurate and up-to-date knowledge about the science of teaching children how to read. For that reason, Reading First provides funds to state and local districts to help classroom teachers improve the reading instruction they deliver to all of their children.


6. What are the short and medium-term expectations of Reading First? [click here]

Students are expected to become better readers. Teachers are expected to deliver consistent and coherent, skills-based reading instruction. District and state leaders are expected to provide educators with ongoing, high-quality support that makes a difference in the classroom. Reading First contributes to these high expectations by steadfastly supporting high-quality local and state reading initiatives with the funds needed to make real improvements.


7. How will we know if Reading First is working? [click here]

Quite simply, Reading First will be working when every child in our country becomes a successful and proficient reader, irrespective of economic circumstances or family background. Further, these efforts work when every child can read and understand a mathematics problem, social studies textbook or science experiment because of a firm reading foundation established in early elementary years through well-delivered, quality instruction. These efforts work when every child is ready for unlimited success and achievement in the later grades because every child learned to read in the early grades.

 

Assessment

Instruction

  • 1 Scheduling

    • 1.1 What suggestions or guidelines can you provide in planning 90-minutes of core reading instruction?
    • 1.2 When planning for the 90-minute reading block, our teachers had some questions about what skills can be included within this time. In this 90 minute block, we combine whole and small group instruction along with small group independent work time (centers) when the teacher is working with other groups. Our teachers want to include at one of those independent centers the spelling portion from the core reading series. The words in the spelling lessons are tied into the stories and the phonics skills presented for the week. Is this considered part of reading instruction within the 90 minute block or should we plan otherwise?
    • 1.3 How much instructional time do students who have an intensive instructional recommendation require?
    • 1.4 Are there restrictions as to who can provide the small group instruction to students needing additional instructional support or in general reading instruction time?
    • 1.5 My staff is coming up with lots of questions regarding what they can and cannot include within their 90-minute core reading time and during the 30 minutes of small group instruction time, such as: spelling, silent reading (Accelerated Reader), grammar, Daily Oral Language, journal, etc. What direction can you provide?

  • 2 Instructional Programs

    • 2.1 Regarding the observation/evaluation part of the grant, my teachers were wondering how many formal observations will be completed and by whom.
    • 2.2 We have some building questions about our unit tests. Our school, at this time, will probably stick with the end of the unit skills test that was recommended. As we collect data and record data, the following questions have come up:
      a. We understand that we may choose not to give the test to students that it is not appropriate to give the test to. It is my understanding that we record them as not taking the test then indicate in the comments box what we are using to monitor their progress.
      b. I also thought I had heard we could modify portions of the test. Can we do this and if so, how would we record the data? As not taking the test, or as not passing the test?

  • 3 Lesson Progress Charts

    • 3.1 On the Lesson Progress Chart, the last column says percentage of students passing on the first try. One of our teachers wanted to know if they are expected to test until they pass. I thought it was worded in that manner so people would NOT keep testing until the student passed. On the Theme Skill testing, we understand we don't have to give the whole thing but only the 5 essential elements. So is that comprehension skills, structural analysis, and vocabulary? Spelling, informational and study skills, grammar and writing skills are optional, right?
    • 3.2 I will be showing my teachers how to fill out the lesson progress charts using EXCEL. Do they just record their whole group lesson (which is indicated in the example)? Do they record their small group lessons as well? If so, how do you suggest I number the groups? Ex: Montoya grade 2, teacher #2, whole group #2a, small group #2b, 2c, 2d, etc. This will be important for Title I and ESL as they do not do whole group. Is there somewhere that the teachers indicate who is in small groups or does this matter?
Coaches & Building Level Questions

Assessment

Section 1: Specific DIBELS Administration and Scoring Questions

1.1 On the Initial Sounds Fluency (ISF) test, some of the kindergarteners scores are categorized as "low risk" but teachers believe that the students are simply lucky and/or fast guessers so that the score does not accurately capture the student's skill. What would you recommend us doing?
For any measure that a teacher believes may not be a fair representation of that child's skill we recommend re-administration using a parallel probe because it takes about a minute. Also, remember that there is another measure that comes into play when determining instructional recommendations at the beginning of kindergarten--Letter Naming Fluency (LNF). So, if the student did manage to get an artificially high score on the ISF, their performance on LNF will impact the final recommendation.

1.2 On the Nonsense Word Fluency measure or any other measure, are students penalized for articulation or dialectic variations for the sounds?
Students are not penalized for dialect or articulation difficulties as long as that is how the student consistently produces that sound(s). For this reason, we recommend that students with these types of concerns be assessed by a person that knows them best. To maximize accuracy in scoring during administration, when a student gives one or two sounds that are questionable, mark the response(s) as incorrect. If many of the student responses are questionable, then a more valid assessment of that child's skill may be determined by someone more familiar with that student's speech pattern.

1.3 Are DIBELS measures available for grades 4 and above?
Benchmark materials are available for grades 4-6; however, goals and progress materials are still being developed.

1.4 What are the approved accommodations for the DIBELS measures for students who are English Language Learners (ELL) or for other students?
Dr. Roland Good has provided guidelines and examples of accommodations within the "Administration and Scoring Guide of the 6th Edition DIBELS" on pages 44-47. (If you don't have this document, you can download it from the DIBELS website http://dibels.uoregon.edu). For students who are ELL the manual states, "A child with limited English proficiency may be provided with the directions in their primary language. For example, to assess a child's early literacy skills in English, directions for the task may be provided in Spanish and stimulus items presented in English."

1.5 Is additional training available on the DIBELS or the Spanish version (IDEL)?
Contact your school's Reading Coach or Reading First Coordinator for additional training on either of these measures.

1.6 We have a classroom that serves students with severe or profound disabilities. Are we expected to test them with the DIBELS?
If the students are in Special Education, testing them as part of the overall reading program depends on their IEP goals. If the students have IEP goals in reading and the students are receiving reading instruction, then assessing them using the DIBELS would be appropriate. However, if students are not receiving instruction in reading then this information would not be useful.


Section 2: Progress Monitoring questions

2.1 What measures should we use to progress monitor students who are not performing at grade level or near the DIBELS benchmarks (e.g., a second grader reading less than 10 words a minute)?
While there is no specific answer for this question, here are a few things to consider:

  • Does the student have other essential early literacy skills? By administering the Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF) or Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF) measures you would quickly determine if these are areas affecting the student's current reading performance. Other diagnostic assessment tools would also be helpful for targeting the focus of intervention.
  • What is the focus of the intervention the child is receiving? If the intervention focuses on building accuracy and fluency in reading, then using ORF would be appropriate. If the intervention is building phonics skills, the NWF measure may also be appropriate. If the intervention is building both skills simultaneously, then it may be appropriate to use both measures.
  • How far away from the benchmark is the child's performance? If the child is reading 10 words correct in a minute at the beginning of second grade, you may want to use first grade progress monitoring materials. However, remember that the goal of the intervention is to make progress on grade-level material, so monthly assessment using grade-appropriate material would provide you the data you need to see if the child is making enough progress to meet his/her second grade reading goal.
2.2 I would like to have teachers choose 1-3 children performing in the intensive instructional recommendation range to progress monitor for a couple weeks then, when they get more comfortable with the routine, pick up more of their students performing in the intensive range as time goes on. We are moving in the direction of progress monitoring ALL of our students in the intensive instructional recommendation range, but they are feeling overwhelmed with the scheduling component still...so I want to move steadily...building capacity at a pace that feels right for us. Does this work?
This is a question where there is no "right" answer as it depends on the resources you have available within your school. Below are a few ideas and ways other schools are addressing this question:
  • Most schools are trying to collect progress monitoring data every couple of weeks. However, a couple of coaches were rotating/scaffolding when teachers would be responsible. At first the coaches and a small team of folks were collecting the data every other week and then the teacher collected once a month and the team once a month to maintain two data points a month. Over time, the responsibility of twice a month collection for the lowest performing students will be transferred to the teachers.
  • For my schools, it depends. At a minimum my schools are monitoring students in the intensive instructional recommendation range once a month. In some buildings, the number of these students is so large there aren't enough resources to progress monitor every two weeks. The expectation is that due to our intervention efforts, that by Winter there will be fewer students performing in the intensive range. Because of the decreased number of students receiving additional instructional resources, the schools feel they will be able to monitor all of these students twice a month to make sure they are making sufficient progress.
  • In one of my schools, the Title One teacher is coordinating these efforts and has set-up a schedule so that they monitor a group of students each Tuesday and Thursday (first ten minutes of the session) so that by the end of the month all students receiving additional instructional support have two data points for the month. They like this approach as doing a few students a couple of times a week makes it easy but still provides time for instruction. The students seem to like the regular monitoring and like seeing their progress charted.
2.3 If I have a third grade student that is receiving strategic instructional support at the beginning of the year, how do I determine if he is making enough progress to meet the Winter benchmark goal? Is there a month by month target?
The best way to determine if your student is making enough progress to meet the mid-year benchmark is to graph student performance. In the graph, draw a line from his baseline data point (Fall DIBELS data) to benchmark goal for January, this gives you a goal line that provides feedback on later progress monitoring data. Each time you progress monitor, add the next data point and determine if the score is above or below the goal line. The general rule of thumb is that if there are three data points in a row below the goal line, a change in intervention is recommended. If the data points hover around the goal line, the student is responding well to the intervention and should meet the mid-year goal. The DIBELS website progress monitoring feature creates these graphs automatically for you.

2.4 I am planning to use the new ORF passages for 4th-6th grades. I noticed that there are only three passages for each benchmark period (i.e., beginning, middle, and end of year), are progress monitoring passages going to be developed? If so, when can I plan on being able to get them from the website?
Progress monitoring passages are being developed and we hope to have them available by Fall of 2004. Currently the DIBELS website is designed to collect data for kindergarten through third grade. Plans are in the works to extend this through sixth grade, however no date is set for this goal. While the DIBELS website does not provide Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) goal levels for grades 4-6 at this time, we do have other sources we can rely on for some guidance. Oregon standards for language arts state that by the end of 4th grade students should be reading from 115-140 correct words per minute. By the end of 5th grade the standard is 125-150 correct words per minute.


Section 3: DIBELS Website questions

3.1 Why does the DIBELS website ask for confidential information such as Free and Reduced lunch population and ethnic status for each student? Are there concerns regarding the security of this confidential information?
The rationale for requesting this information is twofold. First, for evaluative purposes we need to get the information to see how subgroups are doing within schools. Secondly, they are currently setting up disaggregation capabilities for the DIBELS database so that each district can disaggregate data for all subgroups both within and across schools. So far the reaction from districts has been very positive since AYP will be holding them to subgroup accountability. The DIBELS website also uses secure/password protected encryption to protect all district, school, and student information.

3.2 Do we assess students who move in after we collect our school-wide DIBELS data? If so, what benchmark goals do we use to determine if they are on track?
We recommend assessing all students within a week of arriving to a school to determine instructional placement quickly and maximize learning. There are not hard and fast rules about the timing of the assessment, a general rule of thumb is that if the student is assessed within three weeks of the schoolwide dates, to go ahead and enter their data into the DIBELS data system and use the benchmark goals provided by that assessment point.

3.3 On the DIBELS data system, are we only supposed to categorize the Special Education eligibility for students who are served in reading or do we indicate that the child is receiving Special Education services regardless of disability (e.g., speech, math, etc.)?
The intent of the database is to provide general feedback to districts/schools on their full range of students. If a student is receiving Special Education services, regardless of type, simply check the box indicating that he/she receives Special Education services.

3.4 Regarding the demographics function in the DIBELS website, since we are a systemwide Title I school, we do not classify individual students as being 'Title 1.' Should we simply check all students receiving Title I service or determine which students would be receiving Title I services if we were not a systemwide Title I school?
We thought that it would be best for only targeted assistance schools to enter if any individual students are receiving Title I services. Schoolwide Title schools should leave the Title I boxes blank. We can then, in our own database, assign schoolwide Title status to groups of students. The rationale is that students in targeted schools have been identified as at-risk and are to be provided extra Title services, whereas students in schoolwide Title schools have not been identified and may or may not be receiving any extra services. So, the Title I box would mean too many things to be useful for subgroup analysis.

3.5 If I have a 3rd grade student that I am progress monitoring using first grade materials, how do I enter it on the Progress Monitoring Data Collection page? Is there a code?
The Progress Monitoring data entry page will allow you to select out-of-grade tests. When it asks for the test you are entering data for, select the appropriate test (i.e., PSF, NWF); if it's ORF or RTF, it'll then ask for the grade-level of the passage.

3.6 How do I get access to my classroom or school data on the DIBELS website?Contact your school mentor coach for this information.


Instruction

Section 1 : Scheduling

1.1What suggestions or guidelines can you provide in planning 90-minutes of core reading instruction?
There are many ways to deliver 90-minutes of reading instruction each day and each school will have it's own way depending on the program selected, personnel available, and building priorities. Things to consider are the following:
  • The 90 minutes of instruction is a combination of whole and small group instruction.
  • The 90 minutes needs to occur each day to provide students the opportunity to practice and master skills.
  • Some programs are language arts programs so teach more than reading related skills. Reading First requires that students receive at least 90 minutes of reading-related instruction each day. Instruction on other language arts skills would occur outside the reading time.
  • Students with intensive instructional needs require more instructional time then other students so they can catch-up with their peers so they will receive more instructional time then students whose skills are on track.
  • See sample instructional plans posted in the "Instruction" section of the Oregon Reading First website.
1.2 When planning for the 90-minute reading block, our teachers had some questions about what skills can be included within this time. In this 90 minute block, we combine whole and small group instruction along with small group independent work time (centers) when the teacher is working with other groups. Our teachers want to include at one of those independent centers the spelling portion from the core reading series. The words in the spelling lessons are tied into the stories and the phonics skills presented for the week. Is this considered part of "reading instruction" within the 90 minute block or should we plan otherwise?
When the spelling program is intertwined and reinforcing word reading and phonics skills taught within the reading program, it seems appropriate to consider it a part of the general 90-minute reading block. Not all core reading/language arts programs explicitly link the spelling and reading instruction portions of the lesson, so this must be carefully examined before determining it for your individual reading program.

1.3 How much instructional time do students who have an intensive instructional recommendation require?
There are no specified numbers of minutes indicated for meeting the needs for these students; however, it is expected that these students will receive more than the 90-minutes of instruction that all other students receive. This decision needs to be made based on the instructional resources available at each school. The following are some examples of how some schools are meeting these students' instructional needs with their resources:
  • 15 minutes small group instruction 5 days a week after morning recess while others complete journal independently.
  • 30 minutes of small group instruction 5 days a week provided before morning kindergarten.
  • 20 minutes of small group instruction 4 days a week while other students are reading with cross-age reading buddies.
1.4 Are there restrictions as to who can provide the small group instruction to students needing additional instructional support or in general reading instruction time?
There are no restrictions as specified by the grant. The expectation is that if an educational/instructional assistant is running the group, he/she is being directed and supervised to deliver the instruction. However, one should be aware that students with the most intensive instructional needs would benefit from the professional with the most experience and training.

1.5 My staff is coming up with lots of questions regarding what they can and cannot include within their 90-minute core reading time and during the 30 minutes of small group instruction time, such as: spelling, silent reading (Accelerated Reader), grammar, Daily Oral Language, journal, etc. What direction can you provide?
These are very good questions and here is my perspective. For those teaching Houghton Mifflin, I would look at the Classroom Management page in the teachers edition (page 9c) for Grade 1, Theme 1. The tasks in the first 2 groups: whole group (sharing lit., phonemic awareness, phonics, spelling, and high frequency words) and small group (reading support, decodable books, pupil edition selections, independent reading activities) would be the appropriate tasks to complete during the 90 minutes. The final whole group tasks (writing and grammar) would not be part of the 90 minutes, however other schools are including this outside of the 90 minutes in the afternoon. If your school purchased the leveled readers, these materials would also be appropriate for small group instruction. It is difficult giving blanket allowances for small group appropriate activities since classrooms have different amounts of resources (EA's or Title assistants) in their classrooms. I would suggest that it may be dependent on the skill level of the students. Students who are on-track, or on-level may be spending more time in independent reading or peer activities so that the teacher and EA can give more focused instruction to the two lower groups of students who are below-level.


Section 2: Instructional Programs

 2.1 Regarding the observation/evaluation part of the grant, my teachers were wondering how many formal observations will be completed and by whom.
The overall schedule for conducting fidelity of implementation observations hasn't been firmly decided; however, we'd like to begin by completing one observation per teacher between March 1st and the end of the school year. The school reading coach will be completing most of the observations. Regional coordinators will also observe with the school reading coach on occasion with teachers chosen at random.

2.2 We have some building questions about our unit tests. Our school, at this time, will probably stick with the end of the unit skills test that was recommended. As we collect data and record data, the following questions have come up:
a. We understand that we may choose not to give the test to students that it is not appropriate to give the test to. It is my understanding that we record them as "not taking the test" then indicate in the comments box what we are using to monitor their progress.
b. I also thought I had heard we could modify portions of the test. Can we do this and if so, how would we record the data? As not taking the test, or as not passing the test?
You'll want to give the end of unit tests to those students who are participating in the core program. If students are only doing part of the core with the whole group and then moving to different materials in small group, you'll want to just assess the parts the students participated in. For example, if a student is participating in the vocabulary and comprehension part of the program, you could just administer those parts of the test. If the test is written, and all of the instruction has been presented orally and you know that the student does not have the reading skills to take the test on his/her own then yes, you may modify the test by reading it aloud. Just indicate "pass" or "no pass" and note that the test was administered orally. Just remember that the reason we are collecting this data is to guide instruction.


Section 3: Lesson Progress Charts

 3.1 On the Lesson Progress Chart, the last column says percentage of students passing on the first try. One of our teachers wanted to know if they are expected to test until they pass. I thought it was worded in that manner so people would NOT keep testing until the student passed. On the Theme Skill testing, we understand we don't have to give the whole thing but only the 5 essential elements. So is that comprehension skills, structural analysis, and vocabulary? Spelling, informational and study skills, grammar and writing skills are optional, right?
For the LPC you are correct, it is the percent of students who pass on the first try. Teachers should rely on their core programs to provide guidance as to how to proceed when students do not pass the in-program tests. The logic for tracking students that are not passing the theme test is for identifying students who may be instructionally misplaced, especially if the same two students are consistently failing the theme test. On the second question again you are correct- they only need to test the 5 big ideas. However, if teachers are using the spelling instructional tasks that reinforce the phonics rules of the theme, I would recommend also including the spelling section.

3.2 I will be showing my teachers how to fill out the lesson progress charts using EXCEL. Do they just record their whole group lesson (which is indicated in the example)? Do they record their small group lessons as well? If so, how do you suggest I number the groups? Ex: Montoya grade 2, teacher #2, whole group #2a, small group #2b, 2c, 2d, etc. This will be important for Title I and ESL as they do not do whole group. Is there somewhere that the teachers indicate who is in small groups or does this matter?
We'll want to keep track of whole group and small group lesson progress. At the upper right hand corner of the form is a place for the group #. You can really think of that as a teacher number. Assign each teacher a number based on grade. So kindergarten teaches might be 01, 02, and 03. First grade teachers could be 11, 12, 13. Groups can then be labeled based on those teacher numbers. So large group could be 21a, and then small groups 21b, 21c, 21d, etc. Title I and ESL teachers will receive their own teacher numbers so you can number their groups according to their teacher number. You'll want to keep a master list of who is in each group - teachers won't list students in groups on the LPC.


Coaches & Building Level Questions

Section 1: General Questions

1.1 What are the guidelines and requirements of the Early Reading Team that we need to establish in our building?
There are no required members but possible members include the following: Principal, Mentor Coach, Teacher Representative from each grade level, School Psychologist, SPED Teacher, Title I Teacher, Speech Language Pathologist, Community Member/Parent, Regional Coordinator. Essential players typically include the Principal, Mentor Coach, and Grade-Level Representatives. Each school has a unique team and many schools have taken intact committees (e.g., Language Arts Team, Primary Instruction Team) and modified them slightly to serve this function along with the previous function.

1.2 Are we required to use the Core, Strategic, and Intensive (CSI) Maps?
I think they are a good tool, but I am just wondering how often you want them completed and submitted. The maps are a tool we would like all Reading First schools to use for instructional planning. They are included in many of the items on the Implementation Checklist (see Differentiated Instruction/ Grouping/ Scheduling- months 1, 2, and 3). Regional Coordinators will want to spend time going over the maps with you when on-site, but we are not expecting to collect them from each school. Only those taking college credit are required to turn them in.

1.3 Are there guidelines about how Reading First monies can be spent? If so, where? If not, how can we get further clarification?
Questions regarding spending Reading First monies should be directed to your district team leader. He/she may be able to answer your question right away. If not, the district team leader will need to contact Lana Paolillo at the New Mexico Department of Education for clarification.