Victoria Bielomaz

4/13/15
Curriculum Guide Critique: Success For All
Success For All (SFA) is a reading program that is used by some schools in Clark County
School District (CCSD). It is specifically used in the former Edison schools. The Edison program
was implemented in 7 CCSD elementary schools as a way to close the achievement gap in both
reading and math. To do so, SFA was introduced as a means for success in reading. I have taught
SFA now for nearly two school years. There are features in the program that are wonderful; yet,
there are features that do not meet the needs of the students, the demands of the Common Core
State Standards (CCSS), or the demands of the standardized tests (i.e Criterion Reference Test
and SBAC). As a second year teacher, I want the materials the program has to offer, and I would
keep many of the features, yet, I would modify it to be more rigorous and comprehensive.
Features of SFA
There are many features that SFA entails. The features will be further outlined to better
understand what aspects help meet the demands of CCSS and what aspects do not. In SFA,
students are leveled. They may be in a 4.1 class (beginning of the year 4th grade level) even if
they are a 5th grader. This is to get them caught up and allow them to be successful at their level.
On the flip side, there may be a 3rd grader in a 4.1 class. Once students are on the correct level,
the outline of the classes are the same; the difference is the level of the book. So, all of the
following concerns are applicable to the programs as a whole.
The Four Strategies
In the SFA program, there are four overarching reading strategies that are the focus. They
include: Clarifying, Summarizing, Predicting, and Questioning. Each of the four strategies

breaks down into the 2 strands of informational and literature. For example, there are units on
teaching clarifying in literature texts (i.e. Savvy Readers Somewhat the Sailor) as well as
informational texts (i.e. Savvy Readers Capital Monuments: Memories in Stone). This is in line
with CCSS as they focus highly on both informational and literature works. Once the students
have learned the strategy they can take them and use them in the texts throughout the rest of the
quarter/school year. For example, if they learn how to clarify, they can read Charlottes Web,
Tuck Everlasting, Oceans, or Amazing Animals and practice their strategy in both literature and
informational texts. Though students use these four strategies, they are not the main focus, which
is the reading objectives. This means the teachers can focus on CCSS (i.e. Cause and Effect, Text
Feature, Characterization, etc.).
The Four Strategies Limitations
Usually, a school will pick one strategy for a quarter (usually lasting 9 weeks). They do
this because this is a scripted program and teaching a strategy takes nine to eleven reading blocks
lasting at least an hour and 35 minutes. Due to the fact that teaching the strategy takes so long
and would cut into the time teachers are teaching the CCSS, students will only cover 4 of the 8
strategies in a school year. Meaning, they might get to Clarifying and Summarizing in both
informational and literature but they will skip out on Predicting and Questioning altogether.
Needless to say, all of these aspects are important.
Vocabulary
During the units throughout a quarter, each lesson cycle has eight vocabulary words that
students learn. Students are expected to rate their words each day to see if they understand the
word. Meanwhile, the teacher explicitly teaches the vocabulary with definitions, pictures, videos,
and meaningful sentences. Throughout the week, students make meaningful sentences and work

on these eight words because they are used in the current text they are reading. They also have a
chance to find the words in other books they are reading, listen for them in conversation, or hear
them on TV. If they find them, they can share with the class for Team Celebration Points. This is
great because it builds vocabulary in the frequently-ELL population, and provides background
for when they are reading the text.
Vocabulary Limitations
The limitations of the vocabulary is that at times, the flip charts for the program give one
definition of a word, while the book uses the word in a different way. For example, it may teach
the kids that the word sow means something like sowing the seeds in springtime, yet in the text
it will refer to sow as a female pig. This is very confusing for the students. Of course, the answer
is to teach more than one definition at a time, yet for some students, eight words can already be
overwhelming. Also, with vocabulary, it would be beneficial to teach children words using
prefixes and suffixes, so that they can decode as needed. Yet, SFA only very briefly touches on
this. They also only cover some of the roots and affixes, not all of them.
Targeted Skill (Reading and Language)
As mentioned previously, besides focusing on the reading strategy, each unit focuses on a
targeted reading skill. For example, in the 4.1 reading level the skills include: Main Idea and
Supporting Details, Cause and Effect, Compare and Contrast, Characterization, Drawing
Conclusions, Theme, Text Features, and Fact and Opinion; all are definitely major parts of the
CCSS. Additionally, each cycle teaches a new language skill that can be seen in the CCSS.
Targeted Skill (Reading and Language) Limitations
Although many are, not all of the CCSS skills are covered, nor are the skills covered in
the necessary depth. For example, the text structures covered in SFA 4.1 are Cause and Effect

and Compare and Contrast. It is lacking in the rest of the learning targets of the CCSS. For
example, according to the CCSS,
Students must determine the overall text structure by using signal or sequence
words and determining how events or ideas relate to one another. Students must evaluate
how the text structure connects the events, ideas, concepts and information presented in
the text. Students must determine why an author chose a text structure. Students must
describe the order of events in a chronologically organized text. Students must describe
the cause and explain why it led to a specific effect. Students must describe the problem
and possible solution(s) to the problem from a text.
None of these are a part of the SFA program. The SFA program focuses mostly on
identifying some of the text structures, and the level of thinking is DOK 1, maybe DOK 2 at its
best. This is only one example of how SFA does not meet the rigor demanded by the CCSS.
The same issues with the targeted reading skill transfers to the targeted language skills.
Some important skills in language are being taught, yet not at the depth needed. For example,
when teaching roots and affixes, only certain ones like un- will be covered. Yet, to be successful
students needs more than just one or two roots and affixes.
Listening Comprehension
This part of SFA allows the teacher to read part of the selection and do Think Alouds.
They shows the students what good readers do (i.e. using the reading strategies, using the Target
Skill, etc.), then, the students get to do partner reading. Finally, they do silent reading. This is
one aspect of SFA that I personally like. Also, SFA offers some really great books that are highly
interesting to the children.
Listening Comprehension Limitations

The issue with the Listening Comprehension section is that many times students have too
little to read. If students are doing a 4.1 level book like Whump World, they may only be reading
5 to 6 minutes during the 135-minute block. This is quite unacceptable, seeing as research shows
that the more on time reading a student does, the better they fare academically and on
standardized tests. Also, some of the books are of little interest to the children and they may be
stuck reading it for weeks.
Think-And-Connect and Write-On
After doing silent reading, students are to answer four questions on the text. Three of
them, the Think-And-Connect, are questions that they answer verbally. The other one, Write-On,
is written. They are to answer the question using a question stem and evidence from the text to
support their answers. The students then use rubrics to grade their peers and themselves. They
can reflect on their own work to make sure they have what they need to achieve that 100% score.
Think-And-Connect and Write-On Limitations
The problem with this section is that the questions are not rigorous. The level of
questioning is usually a DOK 1 or 2. If the students are only doing these types of questions,
when they go to take CRT and SBAC they stumble.
Fluency In 5
Students spend 5 minutes each day listening to their partner read a section of the text and
work on fluency. They talk about having correct words, having good voice and reading at an
appropriate pace. Fluency is important, and part of the CCSS. Also research has shown that
students who are fluent readers generally have better comprehension of the text.
Fluency In 5 Limitations

I do not see much wrong with this, though one problem is that sometimes the students
misgrade one another. So, its important to model this as a teacher and then do a fluency one-onone with the kids so they can get feedback from the teacher.
Conclusion
There are features in the program should be kept (i.e. vocabulary, teaching information and
literature texts, using rubrics, Fluency In 5, etc.), yet, many parts of these features are not
rigorous enough for CCSS or the demands of the standardized tests. I would definitely want to
use some aspects but change many.