Wg Observation

1. It is imperative for teachers to not only monitor their students’ behavior in the classroom, but also to assess their students’ literacy development effectively, so they could be ensured of their students’ learning progress, which is the most significant point Tompkins makes in Chapter

In order to narrow the achievement gap there is a big focus of phonics knowledge and learning that reading should be a pleasurable thing to do and not a punishment. Too many pupils

he most fundamental responsibility of schools is teaching students to read. Indeed, the future success of all students hinges upon their ability to become proficient readers. Recent scientific studies have allowed us to understand more than ever before how literacy develops, why some children have difficulty, and what constitutes best instructional practice. Scientists now estimate that fully 95 percent of all children can be taught to read. Yet, in spite of all our knowledge, statistics reveal an alarming prevalence of struggling and poor readers that is not limited to any one segment of society:

In ELED 4444 (Diagnosis and Remediation of Reading Difficulties), I was assigned by Dr. Morrison to work with a peer to create a diagnostic report based on a semester long tutoring project at Washington Irving Elementary School. To create the report, my partner and I ran pretests (Informal Reading Inventory-Graded Word List, Oral, Silent, and Listening Comprehension Passages, Basic Sight Words and Phrases, Phonics, and the DIBELS mid-year assessment) to see what we needed to work on with the student and then we created lesson plans that addressed the child’s needs. After tutoring the student for eight weeks, we post tested him to gather data on how much he progressed. We used the post-tests: IRI Oral and Silent Reading Comprehension, Basic Sight words and Phrases, Phonics, and the DIBELS assessment

Today I began working one on one with “Student M.” Mrs. Gault provided the reading material for me to begin my assessment of “Student M’s” reading abilities. Before starting my assessment, I reviewed a list of words with “Student M.” The list of words were comprised of sight words that students on a second grade reading level should be able to recognize. The first time I went through the list with “Student M” she correctly identified four out of thirty-five words. The second time I reviewed the word list, “Student M” was able to recognize two or three additional words. “Student M” struggled when she read the passage. Her main problem was that she did know many of the words and she had problems when she

IPTS 7J relates to performance activity forty-seven by how the competent teacher uses assessment results to determine a student’s performance levels of all four sections of the Basic Reading Inventory: graded word lists, oral reading, silent reading, and listening reading. During this site visit, I gave another form of the silent reading portion to determine if the student is at the instructional/frustration level on grades fifth through eighth. The student remains to be at the instructional/frustration levels for grades fifth, seventh, and eighth grades. I learned to consider other aspects of assessments besides results to understand and evaluate what a student knows

In early childhood education classrooms, teachers utilize assessments for a variety of reasons. Assessments are used to detect strengths in weaknesses in a specific area of study as well as the differences in the students’’ learning the classroom (Stiggins, 2007). Teachers utilize this information in order to direct instruction in the classroom to best benefit the students in it. There are various types of assessments for education, many geared toward early literacy skills. Two of the more common literacy skill tests for early childhood education are the Gray Oral Reading Test (GORT) and the Early Reading Diagnostic Assessment (ERDA), both of which assess reading for young students. Using the information from the GORT and the ERDA, a teacher can create a pre-assessment and a post assessment for phonics and phonemic awareness.

Chapter two summary talks about the purpose of reading assessment which there three; identifying the students reading behaviors, determining reading level, and assess students’ progress. When you’re a good reader you don’t realize the different ways you read different genre or material like a story versus informational text and how both are different methods of comprehension, questioning, and vocabulary. Another part of reading good readers don’t know about is that we exhibit a variety of behaviors like building their lexicon, making inferences and determining which information is important. The purpose of reading assessment is to assess the reader’s level. The common assessment is testing the student’s ability to read and comprehend text at different grade levels. Another way of knowing the student has a reading problem is when they are able to read their own grade level text but instead a lower level text, Besides that they are put into three levels of reading; instructional level, independent level, and frustration level. When determining the students reading level so many factors comes into play and as teachers we need to know.

I participated in an activity called S.W.A.G, which is an acronym for Stop Waiting and Go. The group’s objective is to stop speaking, go into the community, and actually undertake an activity. As such, several teens and I went out into the poorer neighborhoods in Lakeland to seeks and engage children. We visited homes in the area, going door to door of the houses containing young children, and asking the parent’s permission to take the children with us. After gathering the kids who could make it, we settled down on a porch in front of an apartment complex. Most of the day consisted of playing with the children- games such as jump rope, letting them play in my hair, pushing them around in shopping carts, and playing make-believe barbecues. However,

Hall: I’ll be happy to explain them. The tests that Adam was administered all has an average or mean score of 100. These test have a wide average range of 85-119. Based on Adam’s sores Reading Comprehension he is in the low range because he had a Standard Scores range of 74-80. Adam’s written expression in also in the low range with a Standard Score range of 71-81. His math calculation is in the low range with a Standard Score of 30-43 and His math reasoning is in the very low range of 5-12. Don’t let these numbers scare you. This is just a form of measurement for us to understand Adam’s weakness and strengths. These numbers also help determine eligibility for special education. With your written consent we can proceed with the process. Adam will be assigned a team of experts that includes: Adam, the principle, his general education teacher, the special education resource teacher, myself and of course the pair of you. Mr. and Mrs. Gallery you will have a very active role in deciding how Adam will be taught. The professional can provide you with researched based data and evidence, and strategies. However, if you notice anything that isn’t working you are the only experts on Adam. We will develop an Individual Educational Plan or IEP and develop strategies, accommodations and modifications. We recommend that He is remains in the general education class but pulled out for resource room for the areas of weakness. We will also provide strategies that can be used at home.

WYP Ngo attempted to see the youth in YRC (Youth Reporting Center), but was denied permission because the youth's secondary probation officer did not grant permission (did not have an appointment). WYP Ngo had contacted the probation officer (PO) and left a voice mail, but the PO did not respond. WYP Ngo was informed the youth has changed PO to PO Rivera (the youth did not change PO), due to the grandmother is a spanish speaker. WYP Ngo discussed with PO Rivera to confirm the statement. WYP Ngo will attempt to contact PO WIlson to get permission to meet with the youth again. The next one on one will be when WYP Ngo gets permission.

The child knew how to turn the pages, show me the title of the book, and show me the title page of the book. The child struggled in holding the book right side up, showing me the front cover, and the back cover, and finding the first page of text. The child was not able to tell me what the author or the illustrator did. With the conventions of print the child was able to tell me where it tells the story at, where we start to read. Lastly the he could tell me that we read from left to right and top to bottom. The child struggled with the return sweep when reading. The child excelled in showing me the spaces between words, and pointing out letters to me. The child struggled in one on one reading, and finding word boundaries around a word. The child also had problems with finding the first word on the page, and the last word on the page, and with counting the words and letters for me. The child was not able to show me the difference between a capital and lowercase letter. The child was able to identify the letters on a page, some of the specific letters that I pointed to, and also was able to identity some of the letters in his name. The child was also able to name some of the letters on a page, some of the specific letters, and some of the letters in his name. He was able to

Differentiation is the key for these students. All students may be working on the same objective, but for this group, the assignment will be given in a different style to accommodate their learning. This will help ensure that they complete understand the material being taught. The student may just need the process or the product of the material to be different. The distinction between below – average readers and severely disable readers is an important one. Wherever we as educators draw the line separating the two groups, the idea is that instruction should vary depending on the severity of a child’s reading difficulty. Because fluency incorporates automatic word recognition, it is reflected in the narrow view of reading. However,

This question which is narrowed down by the results in a complicated statistical form does not address the fact that each comparison group that Margo chose was not labeled as deficient in the classroom or on their standardized test as the Team Read readers were when they were chosen for Team Read. These results that were detailed in Margo’s evaluation lacked credibility as the sample comparison group was generally not the same as the Team Read program participants. The participant often took what is referred to as a similar test but differs in comparison which can cause validity issues around the board for the independent evaluator.

Zarillo (2007) notes that in the case of children who have not acquired concepts about print, “these concepts must be explicitly taught” (13). For Peyton, who has lost a lot of vital foundational instructional time, Ms. Oglesby will have to provide direct intervention lessons. Initially, Ms. Oglesby could start by modeling text direction with a picture book. She could pull Peyton with a small group and read the text aloud to them. Then, she could have each student re-read a page in the group, having the children follow along with the text as they read with their fingers. She could place Peyton in the center of this group and have the group share their reading from his right to his left. In this way, Peyton would observe his peers practicing