Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 5

Summary In this assignment we are to choose one of the assessment categories used by Miss Keetow.

After selecting an assessment, we are to analyze the results and arrange students into justifiable instructional groups. Explanation of Assessments In the fall, Miss Keetows first grade class was assessed on four different formative assessments. The first assessment given was the Letter Name Fluency. This standardized test measures if students can name letters. It is administered individually and is given to students from fall of Kindergarten through fall of first grade. The second assessment given was the Letter Sound Fluency. This test measures if students can recognize and produce the initial sound in an orally presented word. It is administered individually and is given to students from beginning of Kindergarten through mid Kindergarten. The third assessment given was the Phoneme Segmentation Fluency. This assessment measures a students ability to segment three- and four phoneme words into their individual phonemes fluently. It is also administered individually and is given to students from mid-kindergarten through the end of first grade. Last but not least, the final assessment given was the Nonsense Word Fluency assessment. This

assessment measures knowledge of the alphabet and whether students can blend letters into words in which letters represent their most common sounds. It is administered individually and is given to students from midkindergarten through the beginning of second grade. I found some of this information from University of Oregons UO Dibels Data System. Test Results Miss Keetows first grade class consists of 15 students. There are eight boys and seven girls. Her class is divided into three levels: above average, average, and below average. At the beginning of the school year, Miss Keetow conducted four formative assessments with her students: Letter Name Fluency, Letter Sound Fluency, Phoneme Segmentation Fluency, and Nonsense Word Fluency. The class got an average of 51.73 in the Letter Name Fluency assessment. They got an average of 37.13 in the Letter Sound Fluency assessment. The students got an average of 48.46 in the Phoneme Segmentation Fluency assessment and an average of 47.73 in the Nonsense Word Fluency assessment. Interpretation of Data The assessment I used to determine the instructional groups was the Letter Name Fluency assessment. Miss Keetows class is grouped into three instructional groups. The students are arranged into above average, average, and below average instructional groups.

Betty Cann, Barbie Dahl, Milo Minute, Rusty Nales and Al Gee are in the above average group. Robin Banks, Candi Barr, Ann Chovie, Harrison Fire, Ella Mentry, Anna Mull, Rick O Shae and Neil Down are in the largest group, which is average. Scott Free and Paige Turner are in the below average group. After analyzing the data and box and whisker charts, I decided that three instructional groups were plenty. I originally placed the students in the groups based on how they did in all four assessments, but after further consideration I decided to base what groups the students went in by analyzing their scores from the Letter Name Fluency and Letter Sound Fluency assessments. I did this because from what Ive analyzed, the assessments work together. In order for students to name letters students need to be able to recognize and produce the initial sound in a word, vice versa. The largest group was the average instructional group, which is great considering most students should be at this level. Scott and Paige were the only students struggling. They will need the most assistance. Diagnostic Assessment To work effectively with students I think I would have to know a bit about what makes them tick, how to relate to them, and how to plan and conduct activities that will be meaningful and memorable learning

experiences for them. I also think monitoring the students progress monthly or even weekly would help me. Reflection Overall analyzing the data was reasonable. To help me analyze the data, I color coded each percentile category (shown below). This way, I was able to compare each students level of skill with the percentile levels. Placing the students into instructional groups was simple as well. The one thing I had a hard time achieving, was justifying the instructional groups. I know why I grouped the students the way I did but I had a difficult time typing my reasons down in this paper. I just wasnt sure if it would make sense to you as it did to me.
LNF 49 55 66 42 60 41 72 27 61 35 70 63 63 49 23 LSF 31 41 43 30 56 26 30 29 40 31 77 31 42 41 9 PSF PSF 68 44 60 57 65 41 43 54 36 53 62 42 47 47 8 NWF 30 74 52 40 103 25 60 23 49 26 62 47 85 31 9 NWF

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.


LNF

Robin Banks Candi Barr Betty Cann Ann Chovie Barbie Dahl Neil Down Harrison Fire Scott Free Al Gee Ella Mentry Milo Minute Anna Mull Rusty Nales Rick OShae Paige Turner LSF

90%ile 75%ile 50%ile 25%ile 10%ile

65 56-64 45-55 33-44 23-32

90%ile 75%ile 50%ile 25%ile 10%ile

49 39-48 30-38 20-29 12-19

90%ile 75%ile 50%ile 25%ile 10%ile

58 49-57 38-48 26-37 10-25

90%ile 75%ile 50%ile 25%ile 10%ile

63 44-62 30-43 19-29 9-18

Works Cited "University of Oregon Center on Teaching and Learning." DIBELS Initial Sound Fluency. University of Oregon Center on Teaching and Learning, n.d. Web. 21 Sep 2012. <https://dibels.uoregon.edu/measures/isf.php>. "Letter Naming Fluency." DIBELS Online. Dynamic Measurement Group, Inc., n.d. Web. 21 Sep 2012.