By Tonia Anderson & Laura Waarvick CI 510 Literacy Assessment Fall 2010

1. School Assessment Plan By Tonia Anderson & Laura WaarvickCI 510 Literacy AssessmentFall 2010

2. School Statistics Demographics Program Enrollment • 508 Student Population • Asian or Pacific islander 9% • Black 1% • Hispanic 18% • White 64% • Multiple Categories 6% • SPED 11% • ESL 17% • Free & Red. Lunch 29% • TAG 5% OR Report Card Rating: OUTSTANDING AYP: Met 96% Teachers are highly qualified 56% Masters Degree or higher

3. Assessments School-wide In-class • Each student: • DRA (biannually) • DIBELS (Tier 1 students 3x a year) • OAKS (grades 3–5, Spring) • ELPA (ELLs) (Spring) • Tier 2 & 3 students are progress monitored weekly with DIBELS • Varies from Teacher to Teacher but may include: • Spelling Tests • 6 + 1 Traits Writing Prompts • Informal Observations • Informal Reading Inventories • “Exit-slips”

4. Time DRA 20 - 40 minutes DIBELS = QUICK (minutes per assessment) OAKS (No time limit. 3 attempts to attain a pass/exceeds score)

5. Accommodations • Made on an individual student basis • OAKS, ELPA, DRA • Can include: extra time, hard copy of digital tests, instructions given in native language. • All IEP and 504 Plan accommodations are followed.

6. Results DRA and DIBELS results entered into a data base Data base viewed by class/school/district Individual student results used to guide instruction DRA: Reading Recovery Level DIBELS: percentile score OAKS: passed or exceeded score—used to determined AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress

7. Analysis • Cognitive Reading Model is at work at this school. • The school and district are operating from the assumption that reading comprehension occurs when: • 1) the reader has automatic word recognition; • 2) the reader has vocabulary knowledge, background knowledge, and sufficient text structure and/or genre knowledge; • 3) the reader can utilize the strategies needed to achieve the purpose in reading.

8. Staff Considerations • The Reading Specialist wishes that all teachers would use the DRA information for more than just reading level. • Storytown from Harcourt is the school’s core curriculum reading program. Teachers have freedom with the material. • Other curriculum is incorporated into instruction, as well (i.e., Lucy Calkins 3 day writes). • OAKS demands too much time and influences what teachers teach. • Teachers are organized, satisfied with the curriculum, know where students “are,” and plan for future instruction. • DIBLES is not a useful assessment for the upper grades.

9. Alignment of Standards—Teacher-Created Assessments KEY: M = Meets NI = Needs Improvement * more information needed

10. Alignment of Standards—Formal Assessments KEY: M = Meets NI = Needs Improvement *more information needed

11. Suggestions for Improvement • Depend more on teacher assessments vs. constant DIBELS for struggling students • Cut down on DIBELS testing for TIER 2 & 3 students to once a month • Involve families and students in creating assessment

12. Discussion Questions Is it possible for a national standardized test to include families and the local communities? If so, what kinds of questions would it include? How would the test authors go about gathering the information? How would a nationally standardized test that includes local input be scored? Do you have any suggestions to improve this school?