标杆管理方式有效咧阅读程序（ benchmarking toolfor effective schoolwide reading programs）.docVIP

Planning and Evaluation Tool for Effective Schoolwide Reading Programs - Revised (PET-R) Edward J. Kame’enui, Ph.D. Deborah C. Simmons, Ph.D. Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement College of Education University of Oregon Revised May, 2003 *Based on: Sugai, G., Horner, R., Todd, A. (2000). Effective behavior support: Self-assessment survey. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.  Planning and Evaluation Tool for Effective Schoolwide Reading Programs - Revised School: Date: Position (check one): Administrator Teacher Paraprofessional/Educational Assistant Grade Level Team Current Grade(s) Taught (if applicable): Kindergarten First Second Third Years of Teaching Experience: Years at Present School: Directions Based on your knowledge of your school’s reading program (e.g., goals, materials, allocated time), please use the following evaluation criteria to rate your reading program’s implementation. Each item has a value of 0, 1, or 2 to indicate the level of implementation (see below). Please note that some items are designated with a factor, (e.g.,?x?2). Items with this designation are considered more important in the overall reading program. Multiply your rating by the number in parentheses and record that number in the blank to the left of the item. In the right-hand column of the table, document evidence available to support your rating for each item. Levels of Implementation Description 0 = Not in place 1 = Partially in place 2 = Fully in place Planning and Evaluation Tool for Effective Schoolwide Reading Programs Internal/External Auditing Form 0 1 2 Not in place Partially in place Fully in place Evaluation criteria documentation of evidence I. Goals, Objectives, Priorities – Goals for reading achievement are clearly defined, anchored to research, prioritized in terms of importance to student learning, commonly understood by users, and consistently employed as instructional gui