Context:

I completed the Reading Assessment Assignment for RE 3030 under the advisement of Dr. Janet W. Bloodgood in the spring of 2007 as a Block I requirement. The assessment included an analysis of students’ orthographic word knowledge using the Qualitative Inventory of Word Knowledge (Schlagal, 2003). I gave this class assessment to all the students in a fifth grade classroom at Moravian Falls Elementary School. I gave the assessment, scored it, interpreted instructional reading levels for the students based on the scores, and projected instructional implications based on the data.

I also administered the Early Reading Screening Inventory (Morris, 2003) to a first grade student at Moravian Falls Elementary School. After this assessment, I also scored it to determine how much the student knows about the alphabet, concept of words, site word recognition, and more.

Impact:

Both of these assessments are tools that provide teachers with accurate and useful information about students’ reading capabilities. The Qualitative Inventory of Word Knowledge allows teachers to determine students’ conceptual understandings of English orthography. Not only does the assessment provide data that can be used to target instruction in word study (spelling) but also the data provides information about reading ability. Studies have shown a high correlation between students’ knowledge of English orthography (as revealed in the assessment) and their ability to read texts in English: Students who perform well on the Qualitative Inventory of Word Knowledge tend to perform well on other reading assessments. Students who do not perform well on one tend not to perform well on the other. Essentially the Qualitative Inventory of Word Knowledge data indicates instructional levels for word study, as well as reading. This assessment also helps teachers determine appropriate leveled books for their students.

The Early Reading Screening Inventory informs teachers about students’ reading readiness- knowledge necessary to learn to read. It specifically documents what letters children are able to recognize and write, what sight words children can read, whether children have the concept of what a word is (revealed in the finger pointing task), what developmental stages children are in with respect to an understanding of word knowledge and whether children have phonemic awareness (revealed in the spelling task), and children’s ability to identify high-frequency words and decode regular patterned words. All of this data can be used to determine specific instruction that children need.

I plan to use these assessment tools when I am a teacher to determine students’ knowledge of the reading process and to appropriately match materials and instruction to individual student needs. These assessments also enable me to see the range of abilities students can have in one classroom.

Alignment:

The Reading Assessment Assignment meets the following North Carolina Department of Public Instruction Standards for Elementary Education:

-Standard 1, Indicator 1: Teachers know the developmental stages of language acquisition.

By administering these two assessments, I know the developmental stages of language acquisition. In addition, the Early Reading Screening Inventory informed me about early developmental stages, and the ASU Word Recognition Inventory informed me of reading stages in elementary school readers.

-Standard 1, Indicator 4: Teachers understand the elementary school child’s social, cultural, linguistic, cognitive, and affective backgrounds as they relate to the ability to develop effective communication processes (listening, speaking, reading, and writing).

These assessments provide data about elementary school children’s linguistic and cognitive knowledge, which will influence their ability to obtain new information.

-Standard 1, Indicator 8: Teachers know and understand written and oral composition processes. They understand: The written language as a symbolic system. The phonemic, morphemic, semantic, syntactic, and pragmatic systems of language and their relation to the reading and writing process.

This is also addressed by the assessment assignment. It met this indicator by me using my knowledge of the symbolic system of children’s invented spelling (Qualitative Inventory of Word Knowledge and Early Reading Screening Inventory) to interpret assessment data. I interpreted how the data from the assessments reveal students’ awareness of the phonemic, morphemic, and morphophonemic systems of language and their impact on reading and writing.

-Standard 7, Indicator 3: Teachers promote new learning by using students’ prior knowledge, misconceptions, and interests when designing lessons.

I used assessment data to target and promote student learning. I took the students’ prior knowledge, misconceptions, and interests to design lessons for each student depending on their needs.

-Standard 7, Indicator 6: Teachers modify instruction and assessments to meet the needs of individual students.

I used data from the Qualitative Inventory of Word Knowledge, the Early Reading Screening Inventory, and the ASU Word Recognition Inventory to modify instruction to better meet the needs of individual students. This is accomplished when selecting appropriate materials and instruction to match students’ developmental levels in reading ability.

-Standard 7, Indicator 7: Teachers develop and use a variety of formal and alternative assessment strategies as an integral part of instruction and learning appropriate for assessing individual, peer, team, and collaborative skills.

This standard is met by using these assessment tools as an integral part of teaching, to gather information about what students know before designing and delivering instruction with an eye toward providing instruction that matches a student’s zone of proximal development.

-Standard 8, Indicator 1: Teachers teach children to read with a balanced instructional program that includes an emphasis on the use of letter/sound relationships (phonics), context (semantic and syntactic), and text that has meaning for students.

This is met because these assessment instruments measure aspects of the reading process that represent a balanced perspective on reading assessment and reading instruction. I can use these assessments to teach students about letter/sound relationships and the meaning of different elements, such as vocabulary.