Best Practices
Variety of Assessment Techniques
According to
Rhodes and Shaklin (1993), "assessment implies the process of carefully
collecting or recording and analyzing students' literacy products and processes
in a way that establishes a strong connection between the assessment data and
the teacher's instructional plans" (p. 3). Barbara Kapinus (1995) believes
that the ultimate purpose for assessment is to promote "effective teaching
and learning" through documenting "the individual and group
accomplishments of students" in an effort "to determine progress and
the success of instructional approaches and programs" (p. 163). In
addition, best practices in literacy assessment involve identifying and
focusing on instructional objectives and gathering a multi-range of assessment
data that is utilized by teachers in their efforts to assist students in
becoming proficient readers and writers (Winograd & Arrington, 1999).
The primary
goal of assessing is to collect data based on students' academic performance,
which provides teachers with significant information to structure their lessons
as they strive to meet the individual and collective needs of their
students. In my endeavors to analyze
the variety of literacy assessments to inform instruction as it relates to the
Open Court Reading Program, my goals are to describe this element of best
practices, discuss the importance, and the degree to which the element is
evident in the Open Court Reading Curriculum.
A variety of
assessments to inform instruction was deemed as one of the ten research-based
best practices by educational experts (Gambrell & Mazzoni, 1999). The literacy assessment process includes
using a variety of techniques that cater to the diverse needs of students
(Winograd & Arrington, 1999). There are two major categories of assessments
that are normally involved in a school reading program, external and internal.
Examples of external assessments include traditional and conventional
standardized test scores. The purpose of using this method is to focus on
accountability issues and the information collected from this method of
assessing is used to evaluate the reading curriculum in comparison to other
programs across the nation. In
addition, it also renders data to schools officials to determine ability
grouping placements, whether referral services are necessary, and the overall
strengths and weaknesses of the program (Bean, 1995).
Internal
assessments are utilized by teachers to make decisions about daily instruction. Because external methods of assessments tend
to be useless in creating lessons plans and altering instruction, many teachers
rely on alternative forms of assessments to collect assessment information, which
provides them with a boarder view of a student's academic performance. Examples
of internal methods include portfolios, reading journals, checklists, running
records, think and read alouds (Bean, 1999).
Incorporating
a variety of assessments in a reading curriculum is important because it
provides teachers with numerous tools to monitor a student's academic
performance and alter instruction to assist them with weak areas. When there
are a limited amount of assessment resources included with a particular reading
program, it becomes increasingly difficult for teachers to facilitate
meaningful learning. If the reading program implemented embodies more external
versus internal assessments or vice versa, then teachers are presented with a
restricted inventory of assessments to assess instructional goals (Winograd
& Arrington, 1999).
Another reason
a variety of assessments are essential in a successful reading program is that
individual assessment techniques when used in isolation, such as standardized
tests, render results that often times furnish teachers and school officials
with a narrow view of overall achievement. This assessment practice does not
take into consideration factors such as poor test taking skills and cultural
bias. Also when assessment resources are limited, many teachers are forced to
render instruction that cater to main assessment practices like nationally
standardized tests, instead of providing instruction and choosing a method of
assessment that correlates with the instructional goals (Winograd &
Arrington, 1999).
The Open Court
reading program uses a phonics-based approach to help students read. As I
reviewed the various assessment components that were included in the teacher's
manual for 1st grade, I noticed the lessons lacked variation of
assessments and although some of the practices attempted to be authentic in
nature, they failed to effectively assess the lessons instructional goals.
Teachers are encouraged at the beginning of the year to assess the amount of
skills students retained from the previous year by reviewing the Sound/Spelling
Cards that are provided. The curriculum also suggests listening to individual
students read to assess fluency and provide students with a picture less story
and encourage them to illustrate the text in an effort to assess how they construct
meaning.
Most of the
lessons began with an anticipatory set activity that reviewed skills from
previous lessons and were geared toward focusing the student's attention on the
concepts that would later be addressed. The remaining activities revolved
around isolated skills such as oral blending of final consonant sounds or
introducing the spelled /s/ sound. Throughout each lesson, the primary
assessment techniques stressed were teacher observations, student responses,
journal and creative writing. At the end of each skill related activity, the
teacher was encouraged to do some form of informal assessment such as listen to
the students responses or have the student put their thumbs up when they heard
a word that begins with the /s/ sound, as an indication of whether the students
mastered the skills. The students are then encouraged to complete a worksheet
that is included with the program materials, based on the skills that were
focused on in the activity, for guided practice. The teacher's manual did not
indicate whether to use the worksheet as an informal or formal assessment, but
it could possible serve as another informal assessment to decipher whether
instruction needs to be altered for the following day.
In addition,
the lessons did not include a written instructional objective, it was left to
the teacher to decipher the implied objective or create an objective that
related to the lesson activity. Many of the assessments did not sufficiently
address the implied objective. For example, during the phonics activity in
lesson 19, the implied objective was, the students will be able to identify
words that begin with the /s/ sound. As an assessment technique the students
were encouraged to put their thumbs up if the teacher said a word that began
with the letter /s/. This is a quick method of assessing student's knowledge;
however, it will not grant an accurate picture of how well the students grasped
the concept. Those students who have trouble with the /s/ sound might look at
their neighbor for the correct answer which would give the indication that the
student mastered the skill. It is also very difficult to look at the thumbs of
20 or more students to effectively assess mastery. The teacher's manual does
not make mention of review activities or additional assessment practices, they
suggest that if a student does not master a specific concept to proceed with
the teaching of other skills, with the assumption that they will eventually
learn them in proceeding activities.
Defining
what practices in literacy are truly "best" is nearly impossible as
each researcher and theorist possesses his or her own set of beliefs. However, many specialists in the field can
agree on some principles of best practice that represent "common
ground." Among these is the
practice of providing children ample opportunities to read authentic connected
text (Gambrell & Mazzoni, 1999). As
the old saying goes, "practice makes perfect." Readers need time to explore the strategies
that have been learned and apply them to real texts. Even beginning readers need (and can handle) this opportunity
according to Marie Clay (1991). She
clearly states: "Reading for
understanding and reading independently are possible at any stage of learning
to read, and opportunities should be provided every day for this to occur"
(p. 199). If children are not given the
opportunity to practice what they are learning, it may slow their growth as
readers, and it sends a clear message that independent reading is not a valuable
part of the school curriculum. This
lack of inclusion could extend beyond the school setting into the home,
producing a reluctant reader. In
addition, teachers and parents themselves need to model this independent
reading that the experts suggest by reading along with their students or
children.
Motivating
students to be independent readers who choose to spend time reading is an
awesome task for both teachers and parents.
According to Gambrell and Mazzoni (1999), "The goal of a successful
instruction program should be the development of readers who can read and who choose to read" (p.17). Providing students with a variety of reading
materials from which to choose can be very motivating as long as they are not
too difficult and the children experience success (Neuman & Roskos, 1998).
In the Open
Court Reading program, there is some evidence that students are exposed to a
variety of genres and given opportunities to read. In kindergarten and the beginning of first grade there are
Pre-Decodable books which incorporate rebus symbols and a few high frequency
sight words. These can be copied and
sent home with students for practice.
There is no evidence that trade books are encouraged at the kindergarten
level. Again, it is up to the
individual teacher to supply them. The
teacher's edition does not specifically state that there should be time set
aside for independent reading of these books.
It is up to the individual teacher to provide this time. It also appears
that kindergarten and the first half of first grade focus primarily on
"breaking the code." After the first four Pre-Decodable books are
introduced in first grade, students read from Decodable books through the third
grade with an emphasis on learning new phonic elements and reviewing elements
previously learned. There are also
short phonics minibooks that have carefully controlled vocabulary. When the teacher chooses to use these, the
scripted lesson plan in the teacher's manual suggests that children read the
book to themselves. Afterwards, it is
suggested that the teachers allow students to discuss any hard words, and a
discussion may be held about how they figured out the problem words. The children are then given the opportunity
to reread the text with a partner. If
one is not concerned with self-selection, authentic literature and the amount
of time spent on task, then this minilesson may be considered an opportunity to
read independently and with a friend.
Student
anthologies and trade books are available for grades 1-6. Organized by themes of universal interest,
they incorporate realistic fiction, historical fiction, poetry, nonfiction and
drama. Most of these stories
(especially beyond first grade) do not have the controlled vocabulary evident
in the rest of the Open Court materials.
Students read these materials in small reading groups or as a
class. It is up to the individual
teacher to allow time to read these books independently.
Thus, the
amount of time that children are granted to read independently or with a friend
depends largely on the individual teacher's philosophy regarding the importance
of this "best practice" to the overall growth of the student as a
reader. Teachers with whom I spoke with
all stated that they encouraged independent reading during center time, before
class started or when students finished work early. Depending upon what
materials an individual school chooses to purchase to be a part of and
supplement the Open Court reading program, there should be an ample supply of
books from which to choose.
Most people
would agree that reading opens so many doors for children. Therefore, it is important to foster their
love of literacy early in their school careers. As educators, we must believe that providing children
opportunities to read is indeed a "best practice" and therefore
provide them some time each day. As stated earlier, by exposing them to
various genres, within and outside a formal reading program, attempts can be
made to account for individual preferences.
Without opportunities to freely explore literature in the classroom (and
at home), students may lose interest as well as opportunities that promote
independent strategic readers.
Motivation
exerts a tremendous force on what is learned and how and when it will be
learned. Motivation often makes the
difference between learning what is superficial and shallow and learning that
is deep and internalized. In order for
children to become motivated lifelong readers there are exemplary reading
practices to follow; first, reading instruction were children are engaged in a
wide variety of reading contexts and experiences on a daily basis, and where
reading was done to, with, and by the children (Mooney, 1990). Second, exemplary writing instruction where
children have many opportunities throughout the school day to engage in
meaningful writing activities.
Furthermore, comprehension strategies are taught to the students
including story telling, repeated reading of stories to instill the notions of
revisiting a text, prediction, drawing conclusions, and knowledge of story
structure coupled with well-planned programs for reading, writing, skills
development and masterfully seized teachable moments contribute to the increase
motivation of the learner.
Other
characteristics of exemplary motivational instruction include classroom
management practices with the first management technique being in the role of
rules, routines, and procedures. When
children know what is expected and rules are consistent and clear. Rather than restrict the children, the
routines, rules, and procedures provide the structure that ultimately leads to
children's independence, choice, and intrinsic motivation. Second, when the
teacher recognizes the role-played by the physical environment as it affects
learning and teaching. The classroom
space should be student friendly.
Materials should be housed so that children have easy access to
them. The classroom should be rich with
materials supporting instruction with good planning of interesting activities,
movement from one area of the room to the next, and different settings for
whole-group, small group, and one-to-one meetings help children stay engaged
and act as preventive measure for misbehavior.
Third, the environment must be an environment in which teachers never
talks down to them, a respectful atmosphere is provided which produces a
productive, self-correcting atmosphere where children are motivated not only to
learn but excel.
In a classroom
where there is careful thought, planning, experience, expertise, dedication,
and hard work to ensure students' success in children do not need to be coerced
into engaging in reading and writing - they just do it. These levels of motivation are related to
the following factors: first, the continual opportunity to be successful from
having the right books at children's fingertips, second, the opportunity to
give children choices when selecting materials to read, third the opportunity
to give children choices in writing about things that are of interest to them,
fourth the opportunity to give children personalized instruction in order to
help the child to get beyond the problem that confronts him/her in the text
he/she is reading, fifth, the emphasis
on developing independence and self-monitoring in participating children, sixth, a classroom atmosphere conducive to
learning and success.
The Open Court Reading program provides all
the tools to produce a motivated reader, however, the program gives the teacher
scripted step by step instruction in how to teach the Open Court Program. The teacher does not need special training
in order to implement the program in the classroom. However, the teacher is given the tools to implement a program;
he/she is not given the tools to motivate the students. It is up to the teacher to incorporate this
element into the Open Court Reading program.
What
are the best practices in literacy instruction? This question will produce many answers depending on which
educators are being asked. For the
purpose of this analysis, building a whole class community, which emphasizes
important concepts and builds background knowledge, will be discussed. This idea is one of the ten research-based
best practices that are generally accepted by experts in the literacy field
(Gambrell and Mazzoni, 1999). Within
this best practice the two principles that are closely related are: prior
knowledge guides learning and social collaboration enhances learning. These two principles are what Gambrell and
Mazzoni refer to as common ground principles.
These principles are based on the constructivist learning theory, which
suggests that schools should encourage students to learn new meanings in
response to new experiences instead of learning the meanings others have
created (Gambrell and Mazzoni, 1999).
In other words, students should create meanings based on their
experiences not the experiences of others.
According to Gambrell and Mazzoni the best predictor of
what children will be able to learn is what they already know. Prior Knowledge is what new ideas are built
upon. The more a student knows about a
topic the easier it will be to understand new knowledge about that topic. Gambrell and Mazzoni identify effective
teachers, as teachers that assess what students already know about a topic and
link new understandings to that knowledge.
Not only is the linkage of new ideas important but effective teachers
provide the experiences that enable their students to develop the background
knowledge if this knowledge does not exist.
Gambrell and Mazzoni note that this principle is consistent with
Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development which states that learning occurs when
teachers are aware of students’ current level of understanding and teach new
ideas that are appropriate for that level (Gambrell and Mazzoni, 1999).
Social
collaboration is important for literacy development when looking at literacy
from a social-constructivist perspective (Gambrell and Mazzoni, 1999). This perspective believes literacy to be a
social act. This social act is
influenced by the size and makeup of a group.
Collaborative learning refers to individuals who exchange ideas that
result in co-constructed understanding (Gambrell and Mazzoni, 1999). The changes in classroom participation have
been a result of this idea. Book talks,
peer talk, and small group learning are all examples of social
collaboration. Collaborative learning
has resulted in increases in student achievement and positive attitudes
according to Gambrell and Mazzoni.
The
Open Court reading program has some evidence of both principles described
above. In the teacher’s edition the
first lesson describes how the teacher should find out what his/her students
know about print. This is done by a
series of questions to determine what each student knows about stories,
letters, and the sounds that letters make both individually and with other
letters. The sound/spelling cards are
used from the program to determine what knowledge the students may have in
regards to sounds of letters and pictures associated with those sounds. Children are encouraged to share words that
have the same spellings as the spellings on the cards. Assessing the students reading fluency is
determined by having each student demonstrate his/her ability to decode
unfamiliar words by reading a phonics minibook to the teacher. It is suggested in the teacher’s edition
that this assessment of prior knowledge is done during the first few days of
school.
Activities that
include social collaboration are done whole group except for the workshop
activities. Each reading begins with
the students sharing their knowledge and ideas about the illustrations with the
teacher and one another. When a child
is able to decode an unfamiliar word he/she is encouraged to share this
knowledge with the group. After each
reading there is a response question time when the students are asked to
explain what the story was about in their own words. During the writing period children are asked to share topics that
may be interesting to write about.
Other children are encouraged to choose from this topic list if they are
having trouble thinking of ideas on their own.
When the students are finished writing they are encouraged to share their
work with each other. Each day there is
a workshop period when students can work in small groups. This may be with the teacher or without the
teacher. At this time the students have
follow up activities that review the lessons taught previously in the class.
In the Open
Court program teachers are encouraged to assess their students’ prior knowledge
about letter/sound relationships.
Students are encouraged to collaborate with one another regarding their
knowledge of these relationships.
Children would feel part of a class community in regards to their
knowledge of sounds and letters since they are exposed to the same curriculum.