EDRL442 Fall2012 AmandaHAIR Assessmentanalysis

7/30/2019 EDRL442 Fall2012 AmandaHAIR Assessmentanalysis

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/edrl442-fall2012-amandahair-assessmentanalysis 1/5

Assessment Analysis

Amanda Hair

EDRL 442: Teaching Literacy 1

Nevada State College - Fall 2012

Instructor: Karen Powell



This assignment is for us to gain an understanding on how to group children

based on assessments. We are to interpret the data and group the children how we

think is appropriate for Miss Keetow’s class.

Four assessments were administered to Miss Keetow’s first grade class. The

assessments were Letter Naming Fluency, Initial Sound Fluency, Phoneme

Segmentation Fluency, and Nonsense Word Fluency.

The first assessment is the Letter Naming Fluency. This test is exactly what it

sounds like. It is given to see if the children know the names of their letters. This

assessment is given to children in kindergarten and first grade. The benchmark goal

for fall for this assessment is twenty.

The next assessment is Initial Sound Fluency. This assessment measures

children being able to recognize and produce initial sounds. This is also given to

kindergarteners and the fall benchmark goal for this assessment is nineteen.

Phoneme Segmentation Fluency was the third test that was given to the

children. This assessment goes from the middle of kindergarten through second

grade. This measures their phonemic awareness skills. The fall benchmark goal for

this assessment is 35.

The last assessment that was administered was Nonsense Word Fluency.

This is another assessment that is administered from the middle of kindergarten

through the second grade. This test measures the child’s knowledge of alphabetic

principle. The fall benchmark goal for this assessment is 24.

There are fifteen children in Miss Keetow’s class, eight of which are female

and seven that are male. For the most part the class is performing average to above



average with a few exceptions. Paige Turner performed below average on every test

administered. Barbie Dahl was the opposite performing well above average on

three out of the four tests. Then there was Scott Free who was below average on

one assessment yet above average on another.

There was one student who transferred from another school that used a

different assessment. Despite the difference in assessment, the student seems to be

performing on par with the rest of the class. For many of the students there are

recommendations for individualized instruction if they are performing well above

average or well below.

Out of the four tests given to the children in Miss Keetow’s class, I used the

phoneme segmentation fluency test to determine my groups. I chose that one

because the test is administered from the middle of kindergarten through second

grade, so it was a little more challenging than the letter naming fluency and the

letter sound fluency tests which are only administered through first grade. There

also seems to be more consistency with the scores of the entire group without a

huge gap between the highest and lowest scorer. Although the nonsense word

fluency test is also administered through second grade, it may be a little more

advanced for a first grade class and the children may just guess when presented

with the nonsense words and I believe the huge gap in the scores indicates that.

I have broken up the class into three groups, five children to a group. It is a

basic grouping of the highest performing children in one group, the average children

in one, and the children who scored the lowest in the third group. By grouping them

this way I think the kids who are a little above average will be able to challenge each



other and the children who fall below average won’t be embarrassed that they are

struggling since they’ll see that other children struggle sometimes, too. By keeping it

simple like this it will be easy to transition children when they are ready to move up,

or if they need to be bumped down.

Group one will consist of Robin Banks, Betty Cann, Ann Chovie, Barbie Dahl,

and Milo Minute. Group two consists of Candi Barr, Scott Free, Ella Mentry, Rusty

Nales, and Rick O’Shae. Group three is Neil Down, Harrison Fire, Al Gee, Anna Mull,

and Paige Turner.

To work with the highest-level students there needs to be material that is on

their level readily available. They need to be challenged intellectually otherwise

their grades and scores could suffer. For the children on the other end of the

spectrum, we need to know if there is any sort of diagnosis that requires and IEP. A

child, such as Paige Turner, scored so low that there could be more going on than

just low test scores. Chances are they need some sort of pull out services. Also, Scott

Free may also need a little help since his test scores were inconsistent. I would say

that he may have a behavioral problem, like ADHD, since his scores were so up and

down and a close eye may need to be kept on him.

I found this assignment interesting for many reasons. I have a child who is

elementary school and I always wondered how the reading groups he was in were

determined. I now have a little insight as to how the teacher’s group the kids in their

class. Since I am a speech major, chances are I won’t ever have to administer these

tests and have to group children this way. I will have to group children according to



their speech delays and the assessment that are given to them that are directed at

their speech.

EDRL442 Fall2012 AmandaHAIR Assessmentanalysis

Documents

Transcript of EDRL442 Fall2012 AmandaHAIR Assessmentanalysis