1 / 44

Designing and using assessment systems to prevent reading difficulties in young children

Designing and using assessment systems to prevent reading difficulties in young children. Dr. Joseph Torgesen Florida State University and Florida Center for Reading Research. Western North Carolina LD/ADD Symposium, November, 2005.

carr
Télécharger la présentation

Designing and using assessment systems to prevent reading difficulties in young children

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Designing and using assessment systems to prevent reading difficulties in young children Dr. Joseph Torgesen Florida State University and Florida Center for Reading Research Western North Carolina LD/ADD Symposium, November, 2005

  2. A model for preventing reading failure in grades K-3: The big Ideas 1. Increase the quality, consistency, and reach of instruction in every K-3 classroom 2. Conduct timely and valid assessments of reading growth to identify struggling readers 3. Provide more intensive interventions to “catch up” the struggling readers The prevention of reading difficulties is a school-level challenge

  3. A model for preventing reading failure in grades K-3: The big Ideas 1. Increase the quality, consistency, and reach of instruction in every K-3 classroom 2. Conduct timely and valid assessments of reading growth to identify struggling readers 3. Provide more intensive interventions to “catch up” the struggling readers

  4. Systematic assessments of reading growth: Big Ideas Screening assessments that identify children who are lagging behind in growth of critical skills Progress monitoring in growth of critical reading skills for all children during the year to help plan instruction Diagnostic assessments to help provide additional information useful for focusing and planning instruction End of year outcome assessments in the critical elements of reading growth –is the child on track to read at grade level by third grade-how effective is our program? A data management system that supports the use of assessment information in planning instruction

  5. Systematic assessments of reading growth: Big Ideas Screening assessments that identify children who are lagging behind in growth of critical skills What should we screen for? Kindergarten – letter knowledge, phonemic awareness, vocabulary 1st Grade–, phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary 2nd Grade– phonics, reading fluency, vocabulary 3rd Grade– reading fluency, vocabulary More or less comprehensive screeners – DIBELS, TPRI, PALS, PPVT, have information about reliability and validity

  6. Systematic assessments of reading growth: Big Ideas Progress monitoring in growth of critical reading skills for all children during the year to help plan instruction What can we progress monitor at present Kindergarten – letter knowledge, phonemic awareness, phonics 1st Grade–, phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency 2nd Grade– phonics, reading fluency 3rd Grade– reading fluency Different frequencies for different groups Whole class – three, four times a year Students receiving interventions – more frequently

  7. What can teachers learn from PM assessments? Information from progress monitoring Are the children actually learning what I am teaching? Are the children ready to move forward in the curriculum? Is my intervention strong enough to place the children on a growth trajectory that ends in grade level performance by the end of the year?

  8. 2nd Grade Growth in Oral Reading Fluency 96 80 64 Correct words per minute 48 32 16 Sept Dec Feb May

  9. What can teachers learn from these assessments? Information from progress monitoring Are the children actually learning what I am teaching? Are the children ready to move forward in the curriculum? Is my intervention strong enough to place the children on a growth trajectory that ends in grade level performance by the end of the year? Decisions to be made Should I reteach the last unit to some of my children? Should I move the child to a smaller group, or program more instructional time? Should I seek help to implement a more powerful instructional strategy?

  10. In order to monitor progress adequately, we need two different kinds of information about progress Information from curriculum embedded tests or teacher obs. Are the children actually learning what I am teaching? Are the children ready to move forward in the curriculum? Information from “index” tests like the DIBELS or TPRI Is my instruction powerful enough to place the child on a trajectory for grade level achievement by the end of the year?

  11. Systematic assessments of reading growth: Big Ideas End of year outcome assessments in the critical elements of reading growth –is the child on track to read at grade level by third grade-how effective is our program? Kindergarten – phonemic awareness, letter knowledge, phonics, vocabulary 1st Grade– phonics, text fluency, reading comprehension, vocabulary 2nd Grade– text fluency, reading comprehension, vocabulary 3rd Grade– text fluency, reading comprehension, vocabulary

  12. Diagnostic Testing Purpose of diagnostic assessment-- to provide information that is useful in planning more effective instruction Diagnostic tests should be given when there is a clear expectation that they will provide new, or more reliable, information about a child’s reading difficulties that can be used to provide more powerful instruction.

  13. Diagnostic testing within the rich assessment context of screening, PM, and outcome tests If schools are implementing screening, progress monitoring, and outcome assessments in a reliable and valid way, this should substantially reduce the need for additional testing using formal diagnostic instruments. Will the diagnostic assessment actually provide more information, or more reliable information, about the child’s strengths and weaknesses in the components of reading than they already possess. If it will provide additional information, will this new information be useful in planning additional instruction for the child?

  14. Diagnostic testing within the rich assessment context of the Reading First assessment plan Should students identified as “at risk” at the beginning of the year automatically be administered a diagnostic test to provide additional information to help plan instruction? If you know a child is low in phonemic awareness, letter knowledge, and vocabulary at the beginning of K, what more can we reliably measure to guide instruction? If you know a child is low in phonemic awareness, and knowledge of the alphabetic principal, and vocabulary at the beginning of 1st grade, what more can we reliably measure to guide instruction?

  15. Diagnostic testing within the rich assessment context of the Reading First assessment plan On the basis of the diagnostic information available from the screening measures, interventions focused on critical components of reading could begin immediately, rather than waiting for additional diagnostic information generated by diagnostic tests. The major argument for not doing additional diagnostic testing in this case is that it would be unlikely to add any additional information critical to planning effective interventions, and it might delay the process of beginning the needed interventions for these “at risk” students.

  16. Systematic assessments of reading growth: Big Ideas A data management system that supports the use of assessment information in planning instruction The Florida Progress Monitoring and Reporting Network (PMRN). Web-based data management and reporting network School level entry of screening, progress monitoring, and some outcome scores Immediate reports for teachers, principals, district staff Tied to the Florida Student Information System, so that student progress is tracked longitudinally, and from school to school

  17. Class Status Report for teacher or principal This is an example of a first grade classroom report for December. The teacher can immediately see which of her students are at most risk for not being at grade level at the end of the year, and can use this report to group students for targeted instruction and support

  18. Scores of 60% of the class 5th percentile for class median Student Progress Report for teacher or principal This report shows the progress of a third grade student in becoming a fluent and accurate reader in third grade. At the beginning of the year, the student was classified as high risk on this measure, but the student received excellent intervention, and by the end of the year, he was performing in the low risk range.

  19. Class Tracking Tool Kindergarten LNF Full Year Students only Sorted by Overall

  20. School Distribution Report Interval 4 KG-LNF

  21. District Status Report This report allows district level staff to quickly examine the performance of each of the schools in the district on critical measures of early reading skill.

  22. Using Screening and outcome data to evaluate the strength of Instruction at state, classroom, and school level

  23. % of students at “grade level” level at Assessment 1 using combined index from DIBELS measures 75 65 39 38

  24. Notice the drop in % of students at grade level from beginning to end of year % of students at “grade level” level at Assessment 4 67 52 48 39

  25. Percent of students at High Risk level at Assess 1 33 23 14 9

  26. Notice the increase in % of students at high risk from beginning to end of year Percent of students at High Risk level at Assess 4 28 22 20 18

  27. What are the areas in most need of immediate improvement? Stronger support for the growth of text reading fluency in second grade

  28. 37th percentile 53rd percentile

  29. :Instructional Emphasis for Second Grade 2004 2005

  30. About half our second graders began second grade not having met the February 1st grade benchmark in NWF Slightly more than 20% still hadn’t met the 1st grade benchmark at the end of second grade

  31. One problem that arises from so many students coming into 2nd grade still weak in effective, accurate word reading strategies Growth in fluency requires accurate practice A major factor underlying growth in fluency for struggling readers is how fast the number of words they can recognize “by sight” increases Children must read unfamiliar words with perfect accuracy on multiple occasions before they can become sight words Sight vocabulary must grow very rapidly in second grade to keep pace with normative development

  32. Our third graders are “holding their own” in fluency development, but they come into third grade too far behind in the development of fluent reading skills

  33. 31rd percentile 32nd percentile

  34. What are the areas in most need of immediate improvement? Stronger support for the growth of text reading fluency in second grade More powerful instruction toward mastery of the alphabetic principle early in first grade

  35. 47th percentile 62nd percentile Over ½ of our students did not make the benchmark on time

  36. What are the areas in most need of immediate improvement? Stronger support for the growth of text reading fluency in second grade More powerful instruction toward mastery of the alphabetic principle early in first grade Creative work to develop and support stronger interventions for struggling students in grades 1,2, and 3 – school level must become involved Continued efforts to expand vocabulary instruction-linked to comprehension- accessing words in multiple contexts

  37. Another way to think about improvements and performance – two indices of instructional effectiveness Effectiveness of Core Instruction (ECI) – what percentage of students who began the year at grade level on the screening measures finish the year at grade level? Effectiveness of Interventions(EI) – what percentage of students who began the year at some level of risk on the screening measures finish the year at grade level?

  38. The ECI and EI screening outcome 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1314 15 16 17 19 20 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1314 15 16 17 19 20 21 9 of 13 students who were at grade level continue at grade level ECI = .69 One academic year 2 of 7 students who began the year “at risk” finished the year at grade level EI = .29

  39. K year 1 year 2 82% 87% 45% 55% 1st year 1 year 2 57% 65% 14% 16% 6% 5% 15% 14% 2nd year 1 year 2 3rd year 1 year 2 70% 71% 84% 81% Core and Intervention effectiveness in year 1 and 2 Core Program Intervention

  40. Schools with High Average Effectiveness of Iterventions

  41. Schools with Low Average Effectiveness of Interventions

  42. A final concluding thought…. There is no question but that “leaving no child behind in reading” is going to be a significant challenge… It will involve professional development for teachers, school reorganization, careful assessments, and a relentless focus on the individual needs of every child… But, its not the most difficult thing we could be faced with…

  43. Consider this task for example…

  44. Questions/ Discussion

More Related