Context:
I created this artifact during my RE 3030-416, Foundations of Literacy, class. I created it under the supervision of Dr. Janet Bloodgood during the Spring semester of 2007. One part of the artifact was to administer a spelling assessment to the second grade class that I was assisting. The assessment took place at Moravian Falls Elementary School and was given to twenty-one students. The specific assessment that we used was the Qualitative Inventory of Word Knowledge, hereafter called QIWK (Schlagal, 2003). As a small group we gave the assessment, scored the results, leveled students abilities based on the resulting scores, and predicted pedagogical implications based on the scores.
For another part of this artifact I administered the ERSI, the Early Reading Screening Inventory (Morris, 2003) for a Kindergarten student. The assessment can be used for students who are not literate yet and provides the assessor with information on the students knowledge of the alphabet, phonemic awareness, basal sight word recognition, decoding strategies for new words, and ability to track the words while they are reading.
Impact:
These assessments will be very useful to me as a future classroom teacher. I will need to know the orthographic levels of each student in my class so that I will be able to help them advance in their reading and writing skills. The QIWK allows me to quickly analyze each students spelling capabilities, as well as their phonemic awareness. During our assessment the students were broken into groups based on ability which was supposed to coincide with the students' reading abilities. There was a high correlation between the scores on the QIWK and the reading levels/groups that the teacher had placed them in previously. Those that scored higher on the QIWK were the readers with the highest ability in the class. Those that scored lowest were in the lowest reading group in the class. As a teacher, using this assessment will enable me to choose texts that are at an appropriate level for my students. QIWK results will also give me information about what word sorts would be appropriate for the students to gain more understanding in the area of phonemic awareness.
The ERSI will provide the assessor with information about students knowledge that directly relates to reading. The teacher would have information on what letters the student can recognize and write, as well as phonemic awareness, word knowledge, tracking skills (finger pointing), sight word knowledge, and decoding skills. As a teacher, knowing students skills in each of these areas will help me to prepare appropriate lessons for each student. With this knowledge I will know the areas in which each student would need the most help. I would also know the range of abilities in the classroom and could set up appropriate instruction time for each level.
Alignment:
By completing both of these assessments I have met the following NCDPI Standards:
Standard 1, Indicator 1: I have met this standard because the QIWK data indicates the various developmental stages of language acquisition, particularly in phonics, reading ability, and sight word recognition. Also, the ERSI data illustrates the various levels of development in lower elementary students, particularly Kindergarten to First Grade.
Standard 1, Indicator 4: I have met this standard because the ERSI and the QIWK both measure students linguistic and cognitive abilities that will in turn influence their ability to process and understand new material.
Standard 1, Indicator 8: The ERSI assessment required that I analyze the student's invented spelling. I had to interpret his answers and rate them according to phonemic awareness. Analyzing the data enabled me to see the student's awareness of the phonemic, morphemic, and morphophonemic systems of language and how this awareness would impact him in the classroom.
Standard 7, Indicator 3: The ERSI and the QIWK would give me data about students' word and letter knowledge. By using the assessment results of the students' prior knowledge, I would be able to develop lessons that would promote student learning that would also meet the various needs of each of my students.
Standard 7, Indicator 6: The ERSI and the QIWK would give me the information that I would need to effectively develop lessons that would meet the needs of each individual student. Since each student would have different scores on each test, I would be able to pinpoint trouble sections for each individual student. I would therefore be aware of their needs and would be able to give them additional support.
Standard 7, Indicator 7: By completing the ERSI and QIWK assessments I have used a formal, individual assessment and a formal, class assessment. The data from these assessments would enable me to develop an appropriate lesson or unit that I would teach my students. My goal in gathering this data would be to target instruction in the Zone of Proximal Development for each child so that they can learn the information effectively.
Standard 8, Indicator 1: I have met this standard with this artifact because both the ERSI and the QIWK measure different skill levels of students in various aspects of literacy. The tests measure phonics, letter recognition, vocabulary, and other necessary aspects of a balanced reading ability. With the results of these tests I would be more knowledgeable about student abilities and would therefore be able to create a more balanced reading instruction. These assessments would be used in the balanced reading and writing program.
Standard 8, Indicator 6: While completing the written summary of the ERSI and QIWK assessments I am modeling standard English.
Please wait...