Reader Assessment Summary

Reader: Madison
Grade: 3rd Grade
Tutor: Genevieve Brockway
Date: May 12

With the conclusion of the semester and all lessons with my reader, a final Rigby
assessment was administered to determine the reader's progress throughout her time with me.
Quantitative Summary:
The reader was given a grade level 23 text to read for the assessment. The reader scored a
98% accuracy, an independent level. There were 5 errors and 1 self-correction in her reading; 1:6
self-correction rate and 87 words correct per minute (WCPM).
Qualitative Summary:
At the independent level, the majority of the miscues did not affect the meaning of the
text. In the reading, there were 2 insertions, 3 substitution, and 1 self-correction. The reader
inserted small sight words into the text such as the and and to which did affect the meaning
of the passage. In addition, there were 3 substitutions which were made in the reading. The first
was the replacement of a for the, a substitution which did not change the structure nor
meaning of the sentence. The final substitution was replacing the word gallop with gollop.
This miscue altered the meaning of the sentence since gollop means to consume food or drink
at greedily. The sentences which contained the miscue read, When giraffes gallop, they spring
along and They gallop faster than lions can run. With this substitution gollop, the meaning
changed and instead tells the reader that when a giraffe eats, it springs along or a giraffe can
eat faster than a lion. This substitution does not make sense in the structure of the text. A single
self-correction was done with the word attack. The reader started to segment the word and was
started to say action but self-correction to attack immediately.
The Pinnell and Fountas Scale for Assessing Fluency is meant to assess the fluency of the
reader. In the category of fluency lie the components of rate, phrasing, intonation, pausing, and
stress. having assessed the reader using this scale, it was found that the reader scored a rate of
4, a 3 in pausing, and 2 in phrasing, intonation, and stress. The reader was very strong in the rate
at which they read through the text. The rate was appropriate to the text and contained few slow-
downs, stops, or long pauses. The reader scored a 3 in pausing as she paid attention to
punctuation such as commas, periods, and dashes. Finally the reader scored 2 on phrasing,
intonation, and stress. There was very little evidence of variation in her voice and tone, emphasis
on particular words, and formal oral language when reading the text aloud.
The reader scored 8/12, an instructional level, on the retelling response sheet. When
asked to recall specific details about the reading, the reader was very specific about certain parts
of the retelling but was lacking in other areas. For example, the reader was asked where the
giraffes live and where the story took place to which the response was a hot place. However,
when asked about some of the dangers faced by giraffes, the reader was precise in her
recollection of the events. In a few instances, the reader was prompted by the tutor to be more
specific and the tutor even rephrased the questions a few times. The reader lost one point in the
retelling of the location, two in appearance, and one in movement.
Reader Summary:
When asked to begin the text, the reader was motivated and began right away. She was
ready to read and I could tell she was giving her best. The reader seemed to have some prior
knowledge about the text. She knew what a waterhole was and had very logical response for why
animals should be careful when drinking at a waterhole. I can infer that she had some
background knowledge because she was excited when she told me how lions can hunt around the
waterhole. Although, from her earlier response to the location as a hot place I do not think she
had any prior knowledge of Africa. Specifically to giraffes, I do not believe the reader held much
prior knowledge other than that they have long necks. I was impressed at how the reader was
able to define and describe a waterhole. The readers vocabulary knowledge was challenged as
the word gallop was used in the text. In the initial reading, the reader mispronounced the word.
The reader was corrected in her pronunciation and, with scaffolding, was able to perform a close
read of the text to figure out the definition of the word gallop. At the conclusion of the text, the
reader's response was subtle but intrigued by the subject. The reader is generally somewhat
reserved when working with me so it would not be typical for her to become overly excited
about a text. The reader did show the most enthusiasm towards the reading during the retelling
and was exact in her recollection of the features of the text. The reader above did not begin
tutoring with me until mid-semester and therefore there is no way to compare a pre and post
assessment.