WK2Assgn_Gordon_T

docx

School

Walden University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

6609

Subject

Communications

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by KidSteel11070

1 Literacy Assessment and Flexible Grouping Terry Ann Gordon Master’s of Science in Education, Walden University READ- 6709 Dr. Dr. Ruby Willey-Rendon January 21, 2024

2 Literacy Assessment and Flexible Grouping Part 1: Literacy Assessment Tools Literacy is the ability to read and write with an understanding of simple statements related to one's daily life. It involves a continuum of reading and writing skills, often including basic arithmetic (UNESCO, 2004). Literacy plays a vital role in the lives of our students. As students develop literacy, assessing their progress and growth is essential to identify early successes or struggles. According to Chapelle et al. (2019), "Assessment refers to collecting information and making judgments about a language learner's knowledge of a language and ability to use it" (p.294). It plays a vital role in collecting performance data for students to track their success in their academic journey. My school district employs Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS), an assessment tool designed to evaluate various aspects of literacy development in students. It was created to predict reading difficulties in preschool through sixth grade (Good & Kaminski, cited in Wentz, 2010). DIBELS consists of five core indicators, each measuring fundamental early literacy skills: Initial Sound Fluency (ISF), Letter Naming Fluency (LNF), Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF), Non-sense Word Fluency (NWF), and Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) (Good & Kaminski cited in Goffreda & Clyde DiPerna, 2010). This assessment is administered at the beginning, middle, and end of the school year. Some limitations and strengths exist when utilizing the DIBELS literacy assessment tool. One of the strengths of the DIBELS literacy assessment tool is that it efficiently scores and gives immediate feedback for students' reading performance. It is also reliable in identifying at-risk students early on, which allows for timely intervention, aiding teachers in tailoring instruction to meet specific needs. The data generated by DIBELS enables educators to track progress over time, facilitating evidence-based decision-making. In addition, DIBELS identifies if the current instruction effectively increases the targeted skill and concludes if a

3 child has developed the skill that no longer indicates difficulty learning to read (Wentz, 2010). One limitation lies in DIBELS' focus on specific skills, potentially overlooking a holistic view of a student's literacy abilities. Amendum et al., cited in Garvelink (2018), support this claim by stating that "DIBELS measures have come under fire because of the focus on discrete parts of the overall reading process rather than literacy as a whole" (p.1). In addition, it may not capture the richness of students' comprehension skills or address the individualized needs of diverse learners. The emphasis on fluency might overlook the importance of comprehension and critical thinking in literacy development. DIBELS provides a roadmap for targeted interventions for struggling students, allowing teachers to address specific areas of weakness. High-achieving students can benefit from tailored enrichment activities based on identified strengths. By personalizing instruction through DIBELS data, educators create a more inclusive learning environment. To better support my academically diverse learners, I can enhance DIBELS by incorporating additional measures that assess comprehension and critical thinking. This expanded approach will ensure a complete understanding of my student's literacy capabilities, enabling me to provide more practical support. Further insights into my students' socio-economic backgrounds, cultural influences, and individual learning preferences will help me understand my literacy learners holistically. Part 2: Literacy Assessment Data Analysis Based on the DIBELS literacy assessment conducted with my fourth-grade students and the result of their performance, there is a clear progression from well below benchmark to above benchmark, emphasizing the importance of addressing foundational skills for struggling learners. Decoding, word recognition, and reading fluency are critical for literacy development. Basic comprehension scores across all groups(well below the benchmark, below the benchmark, at benchmark, and above benchmark) indicate the need for continued

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

4 focus on understanding and extracting meaning from text. For example, 0% was reached for basic comprehension skills from the students who performed above the benchmark. 15% was reached for basic comprehension from students who performed at benchmark, 0% was reached for basic comprehension skills from the students who performed below benchmark, and 85% was reached for basic comprehension skills from the students who performed well below the benchmark. In my classroom, the students have diverse learning levels: struggling literacy learners, high-achieving literacy learners, and learners with disabilities. "Reading difficulties are the most frequent learning problem among students and the main reason for academic failure" (Chall et al., cited in Ergul, 2012, p.2051). Therefore, modifying instruction for each learning level will support their strengths and areas of improvement to ensure academic success for all. I will offer enrichment activities such as advanced reading materials above grade level for high-achieving literacy learners to challenge and extend their learning, ensuring continued growth. High-achieving learners require a specially adapted teaching support framework to realize that potential (Kokkinos & Gakis, 2021). For struggling literacy learners and learners with disabilities, I will provide explicit instruction and targeted intervention in decoding, word reading, and fluency to bridge gaps in their foundational literacy skills. Students with reading difficulties are often diagnosed with learning disabilities (Miller et al., cited in Ergul, 2012). I will also offer one-on-one support, personalized learning, and assistive technology tools to boost their strengths and help them improve their struggling areas. I can use the Literacy Assessment Data Spreadsheet as a dynamic tool for ongoing student monitoring and informed instructional planning across all learning levels. The spreadsheet facilitates a comprehensive view of each student's progress by regularly recording individual student performance in key literacy areas. My continuous analysis of

5 trends and patterns in the data will help me to identify areas of improvement or concern for diverse learning levels. By doing this, I can tailor my instruction, implement the targeted intervention, and differentiate my activities to meet the unique needs of all students. Part 3: Flexible Grouping Students differ in many ways, not only in their abilities (Rytivaara, 2011). In diverse classrooms, flexible grouping is vital in addressing students' varying needs, encompassing readiness levels, content areas, and interests. This approach helps to recognize that learners have distinct strengths, learning styles, and interests that can be harnessed to enhance their educational experiences. Flexible grouping involves organizing students based on their strengths and abilities (McKeen, 2019). I group my students based on readiness, aligning them according to their academic abilities and ensuring that instruction meets their current skill levels. Occasionally, students can rotate groups based on interest and content area, fostering more profound understanding and enhancing engagement. Ability groups are significant during school periods. I can work with four to five students to improve their needed literacy skills. The three established groups in my classroom are struggling learners, on-level learners, and high-achieving learners. Having students grouped based on their ability allows me to tailor my instruction to the specific needs and abilities of students within the group. This group also provides opportunities for peer collaboration, where students with similar abilities can collaborate, share insights, and support each other's learning. I have witnessed this daily in my classroom, and it has been creating a collaborative, positive classroom environment. I will provide targeted instruction for struggling learners, such as one-on-one support, small groups, and explicit instruction, allowing students to practice learning foundational literacy skills. They will also practice fluent reading and proper writing, as I demonstrate.

6 On-level learners will benefit from differentiated activities that align with their current abilities. These include a literature circle where students read and discuss books, fostering comprehension and critical thinking. In addition, I will have these students maintain a vocabulary journal to record new words they encounter during reading; this encourages them to use these words in their writing. I will provide high-achieving learners with enriched materials and opportunities for independent exploration. These include collaborative projects, multimedia resources, and interactive discussions about current reading materials, promoting a more profound understanding. According to Dr. Donald Bear, when we understand students' orthographic knowledge, we understand what they know about words and how much they understand what they read (Walden University, 2014i). In addition, if comprehension is the problem, we must help students understand that reading is a meaning-making process (Walden University, 2014e). Based on the Week 1 DIBELS literacy assessment data, I would use a vocabulary development and comprehension activity to organize students into mixed-readiness groups. Combining struggling, on-level, and high-achieving learners fosters peer learning and provides a scaffolded environment. For example, a group will include a struggling learner working on phonics, an on-level learner focusing on vocabulary expansion, and a high- achieving learner engaging in advanced comprehension exercises. This grouping promotes collaborative learning, with each student contributing unique strengths to the activity. Response to Intervention (RTI) is integral in monitoring student's progress across groups. Regular assessments and progress monitoring tools can help track individual and group advancements. It enables timely identification of needed adjustments in instructional strategies, ensuring that struggling learners receive targeted interventions, on-level learners experience continued growth, and high-achieving learners remain challenged. In applying

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

7 strategies to support high-achieving learners, they will benefit from differentiated projects, extended reading, and opportunities for creative expression with technology. Struggling learners will thrive on personalized support, additional practice, technology programs such as (Classworks, Reading Eggs, Esparks, and EPIC), and targeted interventions. By tailoring instruction to individual needs, I can create an inclusive environment where every student can succeed. In conclusion, flexible grouping is a powerful instructional approach that acknowledges the essence of each learner. By addressing readiness, content areas, and interests and incorporating various grouping factors, educators can effectively cater to the diverse needs of students. Through thoughtful grouping strategies, targeted interventions, and ongoing progress monitoring, classrooms become dynamic spaces where learners can flourish and thrive in literacy development.

8 References Chapelle, C. A., Kremmel, B., & Brindley, G. (2019). Assessment. In An introduction to applied linguistics . Routledge . 3(1), p. 294. Ergul, C. (2012). Evaluation of reading performances of students with reading problems for the risk of learning disabilities. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 12 (3), p.2051. Garvelink, R. L. (2018). Understanding DIBELS: Purposes, limitations, and alignment of literacy constructs to subtest measures. Goffreda, C. T., & Clyde DiPerna, J. (2010). An empirical review of psychometric evidence for the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills. School Psychology Review , 39 (3), p.463. Kokkinos, T., & Gakis, P. (2021). Student teachers’ differentiated teaching practices for high- achieving students. Journal of Further and Higher Education , 45 (7), p.916. McKeen, H. (2019). The impact of grade level flexible grouping on math achievement scores. Georgia Educational Researcher , 16 (1), p.48. Rytivaara, A. (2011). Flexible grouping as a means for classroom management in a heterogeneous classroom. European Educational Research Journal , 10 (1), p.118. UNESCO. (2004). The plurality of literacy and its implications for policies and programmes: position paper. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000136246 Walden University, LLC. (Producer). (2014e). Factors associated with reading difficulties [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author. Walden University, LLC. (Producer). (2014i). Synchrony of literacy development [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

9 Wentz, L. (2010). An Evaluation of the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills Data System. Children , 52 (3), p.219.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

WK2Assgn_Gordon_T

Related Documents