The consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) such as soda and energy drinks has been linked to obesity, diabetes, and heart disease, among other negative health outcomes. The consumption of SSBs is of particular concern for children, because they are forming dietary habits that have the potential to last a lifetime, and because overweight children are at high risk of becoming overweight adolescents and adults. In response, many government entities have enacted a range of policies that seek to limit children’s SSB consumption by encouraging healthier choices. One example, and the focal point of this document, are policies that require restaurants offering bundled children’s meals to offer only unsweetened or lightly-sweetened drinks as the default beverage option. In most cases, these policies retain the option to purchase an SSB outside of the bundled meal. A healthy default beverage policy intends to discourage SSB consumption and encourage the formation of healthy habits and conscious choices on the part of the consumer. The Center for Research in Education and Social Policy (CRESP) at the University of Delaware is involved in research to understanding the impact of such policy measures.

Keywords: Sugar-Sweetened Beverages, SSBs, healthy beverage choices, sugary drinks, kids’ meal choices, childhood obesity, Wilmington default beverage policies.

Authors: Allison Karpyn, Jesse Arkins, Nicole Kennedy, Tara Tracy

In the summer of 2018, the Center for Research in Education and Social Policy (CRESP) at the University of Delaware (UD) was approached to conduct a case study of the implementation of the Bookworms curriculum at a Case Study District (CSD) in rural Southern Delaware. The district, which educates approximately 3500 students and a large percentage of low-income children, has historically struggled in getting students to demonstrate academic proficiency and thus turned to the Bookworms program in their reform efforts. Through our analysis, we consistently found where CSD students were once underperforming the state average, these same students are now outperforming the state average three years later. Additionally, these results are seen in nearly all subgroups of students [including English Language Learners (ELL) and special education]. Bookworms taught students how to think critically, understand what they read, and write clearly—crucial skills that align with both Common Core standards and the state-mandated assessment.

Keywords: Reading, literacy, case Study

In the summer of 2018, the Center for Research in Education and Social Policy (CRESP) at the University of Delaware (UD) was approached by staff of UD’s Professional Development Center for Educators (PDCE) to conduct a case study of the implementation of the Bookworms Curriculum at Seaford School District in Seaford, DE. Seaford SD consists of four elementary, one middle, and one high school. The district educates approximately 3500 students in mostly rural southwestern Delaware. Serving a large percentage of low-income children, Seaford SD has historically struggled in getting students to demonstrate academic proficiency and turned to the Bookworms program in their reform efforts.

The Bookworms Curriculum is unique in that lesson plans are Open Educational Resources (OERs). Bookworms was also designed by drawing best practices from leading literacy research and places significant emphasis on differentiation. Additionally, the curriculum is notable in the high volume of reading required by students. In order to maximize daily reading and student engagement, Bookworms incorporates 265 whole books instead of the shorter reading passages that are often found in other curricula.

Key to the Bookworms Curriculum is the daily inclusion of three 45-minute instructional blocks. The first block consists of general English Language Arts (ELA) instruction, the second block consists of shared reading, and the third and final block is designed to provide the class with differentiated reading instruction.

Introduction to the Bookworms Curriculum at Seaford took place in several stages. The first stage of implementation began in the fall of 2014. During this time, UD had four staff members who supported Seaford classroom teachers with their Tier 1 instruction. Training on differentiation (Tier 2 instruction) was also provided at this time to the reading specialists and paraprofessionals. In the fall of 2018, the full rollout of the Bookworms K-5 Reading and Writing Curriculum occurred. As of the fall of 2018, Seaford is still receiving coaching and online PD, with plans for this support continuing into the spring of 2019.

In order to evaluate the rollout and impact of the Bookworms Curriculum and associated PD at the four Seaford elementary schools, CRESP utilized several evaluation methods. First, Seaford SD instructional staff and administrators were interviewed in order to gain insight into their experience adopting the Bookworms Curriculum. We also interviewed the Bookworms coaches in order to gain additional perspective on Seaford’s efforts. Finally, Smarter Balanced assessment results were analyzed in order to determine the impact of the Bookworms Curriculum on academic achievement.

We find that the evidence suggests that Seaford SD’s experience implementing the Bookworms Curriculum and their interaction with the Bookworms coaching staff was extremely positive. While some teachers and administrators expressed concern regarding if the program can serve the needs of readers well below grade level (such as those in Tier 3), English Language Learners (ELL), and students receiving Special Education services, the Bookworms coaching staff took great efforts to help alleviate these concerns.

School staff and administration all expressed support for the curriculum and noted the improvement seen in the academic achievement of the students. Through our analysis, we consistently found where Seaford students were once underperforming the state average, these same students are now outperforming the state average three years later. Additionally, these results are seen in all subgroups of students (including ELL and special education students).

Overall, we conclude that Seaford’s implementation of the Bookworms Curriculum has been a success. While there have been some challenges, many of these challenges are present in any transition to a new curriculum. Furthermore, while some school staff had concerns that Bookworms may not meet the needs of Tier 3, ELL, or special education students, we find that all subgroups of students appeared to show improvement after the introduction of the Bookworms Curriculum.

Keywords: Reading, literacy, case study

Sue Giancola, Shameeka Jelenewicz, Jeffrey Klein, Gabriella Mora, Katrina Morrison, Danielle Riser, Akisha Sarfo