Washington Reading Corps: Impacts of National Service and the ...

CONSIDERATIONSThe list below, rather than giving specific recommendations, is an offering of our reflectivethoughts for the program implementation in the future. We believe the following questions orideas have direct implications for all participants in the WRC, and we want the staff at theWashington Commission to consider these points in their future collaboration with OSPI for theimprovement of the WRC.Systemic Thinking. Is the WRC a short-term program to deal with student reading problemsor is it a long-term collaboration among OSPI, schools, national service organizations, and localcommunity agencies in educating our young people? If it is a long-term commitment, how canschools operate with this as an integral component? How can we enhance teacher roles in thesystemic changes without having them feel intruded on by “lay persons” in public education?Communication. There are many layers of communication involved in running the WRC. Justto name a few, there are communications between OSPI and the Washington StateCommission, between the Commission and the Washington Service Corps, between the keyarea coordinators and schools, between national service members and teachers, and betweensite supervisors and the national service members. The challenge to the current WRC is how tostreamline the communication process and present a clear and consistent message to individualsites.AmeriCorps vs. VISTA. The Corporation for National Service has made a distinctionbetween the roles—and sometimes the training—of AmeriCorps and VISTA members.Because AmeriCorps members can perform direct service, they serve primarily as tutors withthe Reading Corps. The VISTA role, however, does not include direct service. Instead,VISTAs are to work with the community to bring volunteers into the schools as WRC tutors.Such a distinction is sometimes confusing to school sites in face of their priorities (i.e., highdemand for individual tutors in most cases). How can we eliminate the burden of this confusionat individual school sites while still acknowledging the differences between the two?Site Supervisors. Site supervisors are supposed to play a very important role in ensuring thequality of the WRC at school sites and to help school staff understand what the WRC is about.Site supervisors should be a major support that national service members can depend on at theirschool sites. Based on our interviews with key area coordinators, however, it seems that manysite supervisors are not as effective as they could be. One major reason is that they don’t havetime. How we can get serious commitment from site supervisors is a question to be consideredin continuing the WRC.65