Assessment in an rti environment
Sponsored Links
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
1 / 60

Assessment in an RTI Environment PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 132 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Assessment in an RTI Environment . Michael C. McKenna University of Virginia [email protected] •. •. •. •. •. c omprehensivereadingsolutions.com. Why assess?. To plan instruction Screening Diagnostic To see if it works Progress Monitoring . Myths about d iagnostic assessment.

Download Presentation

Assessment in an RTI Environment

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Assessment in an RTI Environment

Michael C. McKenna

University of Virginia

[email protected]



comprehensivereadingsolutions.com


Why assess?

  • To plan instruction

    • Screening

    • Diagnostic

  • To see if it works

    • Progress Monitoring


Myths about diagnostic assessment


Myths about diagnostic assessment

  • You need lots to make RTI work.

  • Only specialists can give them.


Standard Protocol orProblem Solving Approach?


Cognitive Model of Assessment


Cognitive Model of Assessment


Stages of reading development?


Stages of reading development?


An assessment strategy for foundational skills


An assessment strategy for foundational skills


An assessment strategy for foundational skills


An assessment toolkit

  • Screening (Comprehension or Fluency)

  • Informal Decoding Inventory

  • Sight Word Inventory

  • Fluency Checks


An assessment toolkit

  • Screening (Comprehension or Fluency)

  • Informal Decoding Inventory

  • Sight Word Inventory

  • Fluency Checks


Informal Decoding Inventory


Some inconvenient truths about assessment

1.

Miscue analysis is a waste of time.


Her bangs were over her eyes.


Some inconvenient truths about assessment

Decoding skills should be assessed in isolation.

2.


Some inconvenient truths about assessment

Informal reading inventories are unreliable.

3.


Some inconvenient truths about assessment

There is no diagnostic test of comprehension.

4.


Cognitive Model of Assessment


Some inconvenient truths about assessment

Comprehension can’t be progress monitored.

5.


Some inconvenient truths about assessment

There’s no good way to assess vocabulary.

6.


Some inconvenient truths about assessment

9.

Motivation is important.


Some inconvenient truths about assessment

8.

Kids are complicated.


A stairway to proficiency


In our approach, all students receive differentiated instruction in small groups.


We therefore like to call it response to instruction.


Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?


Yes

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Children Read)


Yes

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Children Read)

No

Are all or nearly all decoding skills mastered?


Yes

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Children Read)

No

Yes

Are all or nearly all decoding skills mastered?

Fluency and Comprehension


Yes

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Children Read)

No

Yes

Are all or nearly all decoding skills mastered?

Fluency and Comprehension

No

Is the child at benchmark in decoding?


Yes

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Children Read)

No

Yes

Are all or nearly all decoding skills mastered?

Fluency and Comprehension

No

Yes

Is the child at benchmark in decoding?

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Teacher Reads Aloud)


Yes

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Children Read)

No

Yes

Are all or nearly all decoding skills mastered?

Fluency and Comprehension

No

Yes

Is the child at benchmark in decoding?

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Teacher Reads Aloud)

No

Has the child acquired full phonological awareness?


Yes

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Children Read)

No

Yes

Are all or nearly all decoding skills mastered?

Fluency and Comprehension

No

Yes

Is the child at benchmark in decoding?

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Teacher Reads Aloud)

No

Yes

Has the child acquired full phonological awareness?

Word Recognition and Fluency


Yes

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Children Read)

No

Yes

Are all or nearly all decoding skills mastered?

Fluency and Comprehension

No

Yes

Is the child at benchmark in decoding?

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Teacher Reads Aloud)

No

Yes

Has the child acquired full phonological awareness?

Word Recognition and Fluency

Phonemic Awareness and

Word Recognition

No


If fluency is weak, you should

  • Use research-based fluency strategies like repeated readings, partner reading, etc.

  • Check first to see if there are significant gaps in word recognition skills.


If both fluency and word recognition are weak, you should

  • Use research-based word recognition strategies that are explicit and systematic.

  • Check first to see if there are significant gaps in phonological awareness.


{

Four

Basic

Groups


Takeaways

  • You don’t need many assessments at Tier 2.

  • Get rid of the ones you don’t need.

  • Use your toolkit to form small groups.

  • Reassess every three weeks.

  • Aim for “upward mobility” on the staircase.

  • Don’t forget motivation.

  • Check out each of the group types at:

    • www.comprehensivereadingsolutions.com


References

Afflerbach, P., & Cho, B. (2011). The classroom assessment of reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. B. Moje, & P. P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 4, pp. 487-514). New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

McKenna, M. C., & Picard, M. (2006/2007). Does miscue analysis have a role in effective practice? The Reading Teacher, 60, 378-380.

McKenna, M. C., & Stahl, K. A. D. (2009). Assessment for reading instruction (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Pearson, P. D., Hiebert, E. H., & Kamil, M. L. (2007). Vocabulary assessment: What we know and what we need to learn. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 282-296.

Spector, J. E. (2005). How reliable are informal reading inventories? Psychology in the Schools, 42, 593-603.

Stahl, K. A. D., & McKenna, M. C. (2012). Reading assessment in an RTI framework. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Walpole, S., & McKenna, M. C. (2006). The role of informal reading inventories in assessing word recognition. The Reading Teacher, 59, 592-594.

Walpole, S., & McKenna, M. C. (2009). How to plan differentiated reading instruction: Resources for grades K-3. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Walpole, S., McKenna, M. C., & Philippakos, Z. (2011). Differentiated reading instruction in grades 4 and 5: Strategies and resources. New York, NY: Guilford Press.


More resources …

http://curry.virginia.edu/reading-projects/projects/garf/


  • Login