Week # 5 Assignments: 1, 2, 3, 4

The student read first grade level with two miscues from the word list. The student was able to sound out the beginning letters of the words /b/, brain and /a/ afraid and not blend all letters for the whole word.  Accounting for 16 correct automatic and 2 correct identified totaling 18 (90% independent level) with 2 miscues, 

Word List page 160

https://www.dropbox.com/s/j280g6eoo2hp4co/WORD%20LIST%20107.pdf?dl=0

The student identified 17 words automatically and MC or identified 3 incorrectly breath (did not know), insects (sounded out incorrectly) and noticed (sounded out incorrectly). The student skipped over these words and went straight to word 20. Although, directed back to number 16 word the student struggled with words 16, 17 and 19. With 14-17 correct 70-85% (student scored 85%) is an instructional level. 

Third word list was stopped at tongue-number 8, because the student became frustrated and begun struggling with the rest of the words. This word list determined which level the student's level of reading.

Word Lists page 107
https://www.dropbox.com/s/j280g6eoo2hp4co/WORD%20LIST%20107.pdf?dl=0

The student is ready for Level: Two "Whales and Fish", prior to reading the story the anticipatory/prediction based on content questions are asked.  Of which a score of 2/9, 22% is received. Response to two concept questions was "I don;t know", this indicates unfamiliarity with whales and fish=expository. After reading the passage number of meaning changers were 6, must to most, though MC, live to lived, and a few self corrects. Total accuracy 191-6 miscues % 197=96%, which is instructional level for this student.  Retelling the story questions: indicated the student grasped some main ideas with little detail, numbers correct explicit 4 and number correct implicit 2 for a total of 6 which indicates second grade instructional level.

Page 223 Expository Question
https://www.dropbox.com/s/93yzuj6qplt5caz/PAGE%20223.pdf?dl=0

Page 224 Retelling Scoring Sheet For Whales and Fish
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ka8tg1b815ya0ox/PAGE%20224.pdf?dl=0

Page 225 Retelling part II
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ybyaen2aovzrrll/PAGE%20225.pdf?dl=0

Structure of Reading PP Assignment 2

P.P.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/h3c7eqlic0ml10g/Structure%20of%20Reading%20Interventions%20WK%204.pptx?dl=0

Assignment 1 wk 4

Assignment#1 (a) Describe your understanding of RTI and its structure of intervention in details. What other questions do you still have about RTI? (b) Provide comments and feedback on at least two your peers’ blogs (Due Feb. 17, by midnight, on your blog and your peers’ blogs) 


My understanding of RTI-is an intervention process to develop literacy skills in students that are not at grade level benchmarks in lieu with their peers during an every day classroom setting. However, there is a process and due diligence must be met to suit the students learning needs. In other words, literacy entry screening measures are employed to reveal students benchmark scores for grade levels. Assessments screens ranges from Dibbles, PALS, TPRI, ISEL, and some school districts implement their own. Once screens have determined students levels, it becomes important for all educators to collaborate to share information on a students response to interventions that have been designed to meet the students needs. Team collaboration takes a lot of effort because the students progress has to be monitored and assessed twice a week. If the students continues to struggle individualized intervention are intensified in smaller groups withing the classroom setting. However, after watching the implementation of RTI, in the videos it became much clearer deepening my understanding. The videos depicted RTI,  on a three tier intervention model of instruction. With tier 1 being effective differential instruction implemented by the general education teacher inclusive of evidence based core curriculum in a classroom setting. With tier 2 for students that did not responded to tier 1; with tier  2 building upon tier 1 grade levels of instruction delivered with in a small group for approximately 30 minutes once a week. If students do not respond to tier 1, and tier 2 interventions through evidenced based assessments, intensified interventions are employed in tier 3, still within a classroom setting. However, the student groups in tier 3 are much smaller with increased times ( 30 minutes X 2) for individualized instruction delivered by a specialist or special education teacher. If students do not responded to interventions in a tier 3 model of instruction they are reevaluated as students with special needs. Iron Springs Elementary school was a good example of RTI, their intervention strategies promoted educator collaboration through the reading teacher as coordinator. The intervention taught was Reading Horizons: Discovery Phonics (K-6 reading program) seemed specific to their school. As with many RIT interventions specific to student needs. However, the phonics resources promoted independent discover through goal comprehension, with intensive phonics awareness, computer games, implemented at tier 2 and further intensified in tier 3.

Questions about RTI:  What interventions are in place for students reading above grade level?

WK 3

What is a QRI-5 ?
A Qualitative Reading Inventory-5 (QRI-5) is an individually administered informal reading inventory (IRI) designed to provide information (1) conditions under which students can identify words and comprehend text successful an (2) conditions that appear to result in unsuccessful word identification or comprehension.

What is the purpose of a QRI-5?
The purpose of a QRI-5 is an informal reading inventory which identifies a students reading level, independent, instructional and frustration level. The informal data gathered from a QRI-5 can be used to inform instructional levels, choose appropriate grade leveled readers, assess students reading comprehensions. In addition to, retelling story's to confirm compression grade levels in an informal individualized continuous non-standardized testing environment conducive to student learning.

Have you seen similar assessment activities like QRI-5? What are they?
I have seen a similar on going assess such as RR-running records of students comprehension that could be compared to the methods in a QRI-5. A RR is also considered an  individualized informal inventory of a students reading assessment to inform reading literacy.


What is you impression of QRI-5?
In my opinion/impression a QRI-5 is a comprehensive cumulative non-formal continuous assessment of a students ability to read and comprehend different types of texts in student centered environment with out pressures of a standardized test.

literacy in ELA-is incumbent on  expected performances which measure students: Higher order thinking with critical thinking reasoning communication and media/information technology, strong content knowledge, response to varying demands of audiences/peers comprehension as well as critique peer in constructive communication value and view evidence to build arguments, demonstrate age appropriate levels of independence, come to understand others perspectives and cultures; in addition to building on the use of technology and digital media strategies. The teacher should integrate analytical digital text and a range of information and media. In writing to promote articulation that develops inquiry based on research skills in context reading and writing.  Also, inclusive of student reading comprehension-by speaking and listening in a class content of subject’s inclusive of science and technical subjects.

The 4^th grade samples of ELA lesson Starters I

 Students participate in literature circle discussions of short story-reading and prepare open-ended discussions questions. They used voice recorders to record evaluate effectiveness of points raised in response to peers questions, insights shared and balance participation. Podcast recording can be published with accompanying reflections on the quality of the discussion; ICT literacy with expected outcomes of students demonstrating an understanding of text by working together to identify and ask significant questions to clarify various points.

 In the 4^th grade sample lesson starter 2, students review profiles at entrepreneurial micro financing site such as www.kiva.org students worked in groups to research the economic and social impact of several proposals. Each group selected one proposal and created a presentation to persuade classmates to choose that proposal. Then the class voted on the most persuasive proposal and created an appropriate activity plan that might be used to raise money to support the chosen proposal. From the skills presented/represented were financial literacy, critical thinking, collaboration, communication, information literacy, creativity, and global awareness. The expected student outcomes were to frame and synthesize information from a range of text in order to solve problems and answer questions.

In sample ELA lesson starter 3, students used open ended inspiration for writing such as Chris Van Allsbur’s Mysteries of Harris Burdick, each student writes the beginning of a story and recorded it as a Podcast. Student in other classes were able to listen to Podcast stories, create episodes and record additional podcast until final groups writes and records the conclusions. Expected outcomes are to develop, implement and communicate new ideas to others through original writing. Students represent skills by demonstrating financial literacy, critical thinking, collaboration, communication, information literacy, creativity and global awareness.  

 

WK 2

After watching the 10 mini videos and skimming through the resources, I learned that print awareness with fluency includes sounds of speech in the English language, phonemic awareness, reading fluency at grade levels/instructional levels, vocabulary, and spelling to build reading comprehension. Parental involvement is vital in building word and letter sight recognition. It is important for parents to read to their children at very young ages including in first stages of learning before they attend school.  Also, after watching the video, I learned that building awareness is more than just singing the alphabet. According to the video and research, students have to study words groups, word combinations, and how words fit together in the English language leading into highly developed phonically awareness. In addition to the fluency strategies I learned the importance of choral reading by the teacher in unison with students to demonstrate how fluent reading is supposed to sound. In connection to fluency level strategies: book buddies and phonic games can motivate students to learn in a fun way. I will include some of these strategies in my class; these strategies will add multiple levels of assessments for reading comprehension.  Another interesting implementation was reading tutors in which students use computer assistive devices to develop reading cues, spelling, phonically awareness, and sight vocabulary. The computer assistive device also read tricky words the student was having difficulty with. This was a great addition to motivate students and build confidence. However, the only downside might be the diversity of voice recognition. Not all students sound the same-some ELL’s student have accents and the computer assistive voice recognition device might not be sensitive to different accents. Also, I leaned about somatic gradients with building of relationships among different words spring boarding from vocabulary and concept closed (teacher) sorts with open sorts (student) to further build comprehension.