Assessment in an RTI Environment Michael C. McKenna University of Virginia mcm7g@virginia.edu

Assessment in an RTI Environment Michael C. McKennaUniversity of Virginiamcm7g@virginia.edu

••

•••

comprehensivereadingsolutions.com

Why assess?

To plan instructionScreeningDiagnostic

To see if it worksProgress Monitoring

Screening test

No problem indicated

No further testing

Problem identified

Diagnostic test

Targeted instructio

n

Progress monitorin

g

Problem addressed

Problem not

addressed

Screening test

No problem indicated

No further testing

Problem identified

Diagnostic test

Targeted instructio

n

Progress monitorin

g

Problem addressed

Problem not

addressed

Screening test

No problem indicated

No further testing

Problem identified

Diagnostic test

Targeted instructio

n

Progress monitorin

g

Problem addressed

Problem not

addressed

Screening test

No problem indicated

No further testing

Problem identified

Diagnostic test

Targeted instructio

n

Progress monitorin

g

Problem addressed

Problem not

addressed

Myths about diagnostic assessment

Myths about diagnostic assessment

You need lots to make RTI work.

Only specialists can give them.

Standard Protocol or Problem Solving Approach?

Cognitive Model of Assessment

Cognitive Model of Assessment

Stages of reading development?

Fluency

Word Recogniti

on

Phonemic Awarenes

s

Stages of reading development?

Comprehension

Vocabulary

Oral Language Developme

nt

Fluency

Word Recogniti

on

Phonemic Awarenes

s

An assessment strategy for foundational skills

Fluency

Word Recogniti

on

Phonemic Awarenes

s

An assessment strategy for foundational skills

Fluency

Word Recogniti

on

Phonemic Awarenes

s

An assessment strategy for foundational skills

Fluency

Word Recogniti

on

Phonemic Awarenes

s

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 Part I: Single-Syllable Decoding Short Vowels Consonant Blends and Digraphs R-Controlled Vowel Patterns Vowel-Consonant-e Vowel TeamsPart II: Multisyllabic Decoding Compound Words Closed Syllables Open Syllables VC-e Syllables R-controlled Syllables Vowel Team Syllables C+le Syllables

Some inconvenient truths about assessment

Miscue analysis is a waste of time.

1.

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

Motivation is important.

9.

Some inconvenient truths about assessment

Kids are complicated.

8.

New Terms

Old Terms

Tier 3 Remedial Tier 2 CorrectiveTier 1 Developmen

tal

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?

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency? Yes

Vocabulary and Comprehension(Children Read)

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?

No

YesVocabulary and Comprehension(Children Read)

Are all or nearly all decoding skills

mastered?

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?

No

YesVocabulary and Comprehension(Children Read)

Are all or nearly all decoding skills

mastered?Yes

Fluency and Comprehension

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?

No

YesVocabulary and Comprehension(Children Read)

Are all or nearly all decoding skills

mastered?Yes

Fluency and Comprehension

No

Is the child at benchmark in decoding?

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?

No

YesVocabulary and Comprehension(Children Read)

Are all or nearly all decoding skills

mastered?Yes

Fluency and Comprehension

No

Is the child at benchmark in decoding? Yes

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Teacher Reads Aloud)

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?

No

YesVocabulary and Comprehension(Children Read)

Are all or nearly all decoding skills

mastered?Yes

Fluency and Comprehension

No

Is the child at benchmark in decoding? Yes

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Teacher Reads Aloud)

No

Has the child acquired full phonological

awareness?

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?

No

YesVocabulary and Comprehension(Children Read)

Are all or nearly all decoding skills

mastered?Yes

Fluency and Comprehension

No

Is the child at benchmark in decoding? Yes

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Teacher Reads Aloud)

No

Has the child acquired full phonological

awareness?Yes

Word Recognition and Fluency

Is the child at benchmark in oral reading fluency?

No

YesVocabulary and Comprehension(Children Read)

Are all or nearly all decoding skills

mastered?Yes

Fluency and Comprehension

No

Is the child at benchmark in decoding? Yes

Vocabulary and Comprehension

(Teacher Reads Aloud)

No

Has the child acquired full phonological

awareness?Yes

Word Recognition and Fluency

Phonemic Awareness and Word RecognitionNo

If fluency is weak, you should

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

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

If both fluency and word recognition are weak, you should

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

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

{Four Basic

Groups

TakeawaysYou 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.c

om

ReferencesAfflerbach, 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/