Embedded Files
Summative and Diagnostic Assessment
Introduction
Introduction
This diagnostic assessment was given at the beginning of the year to indicate what experience students have with name writing, letter sounds, verbal blending, word counting, and comprehension. Students will take this test again twice more throughout the year to prove progress in each of these subjects. I can use this data to see what beginning of year skills my students possess, and to see how I can best instruct them in whole group, small group, and one on one to help all students meet our end of year goals.
Class Results
Class Results
In this section I detail how I assessed class results as a whole, and how this analysis was used to inform my future ELA practices.
This diagnostic was given two weeks into the school year and was one of my first opportunities to assess my students' incoming abilities. This test was administered in class in small groups and covers name writing, letters sound recognition, oral blending, and oral story comprehension. Upon its initial application, 5 out of 24 of my students scored 75% or higher indicating a high level of previous knowledge. 5 out of 24 scored 75-50%, indicating moderate knowledge, and 14 out of 24 scored less than 50%, indicating a low level of previous knowledge.
When reviewing these results, I found that almost all of my students needed practice with name writing. 9 out of 24 students scored a 0 or 1 on name writing, meaning that they could either not write any of the letters in their name, of that the letters they attempted to write were either illegible or out of order. To address this concern, the first writing center I created for our W.I.N. Center instruction was a name writing center. Here, students would have multiple opportunities to see and practice using whiteboard markers how to write their name with all correct letters and on the appropriate line.
I also noticed a wide variety of ability to produce accurate letter sounds. I considered this when making my carpet seating chart since most of our oral phonics instruction is completed on the carpet. I spread out students with high letter knowledge so that when we practice our drill sounds during our phonics lessons, students who are more confident with their answers sit next to students who are less confident. In this way, students can hear peer exemplar responses as well as teacher modeling as they are learning these basic skills. I also put some of my lowest learners towards the front of the class where they will have the clearest view during instruction. 6 students received fewer than 5 out of 19 possible points. These students with very little previous knowledge were grouped together into a remedial guided reading group that I meet with three times per week to practice foundational skills such as letter names and sounds, and sound recognition.
All of these results were taken into account when forming my first guided reading groups. Students who scored above 75% were one guided reading group, those who scored between 75-50% were one group, and the remaining 14 were sorted into three groups based off of particular needs, for example one group was made of students who scored high on comprehension but low on letter recognition. Another group focused around students who scored low on oral blending. In this way, I can create guided reading and skill building lessons for each group that target a specific need.
Overall, the results from this diagnostic were specific and actionable when it came to setting up systems and creating leveled grouping in my classroom. This data informed my instruction by helping me understand what skills students had been previously exposed to, and consider how I can intentionally address skills students do not yet have during whole and small group instruction.
Individual Conclusions
Individual Conclusions
While I clearly used this diagnostic to make larger instructional choices for my class as a whole, I also considered my students' individual results and how these reflect their previous understandings. This test is a fairly straightforward test that reviews name writing, letter sounds, blending, and read aloud comprehension. However, at the beginning of the year student results vary wildly. I look at individual tests closely to consider how I can teach each student all of our necessary ELA skills. In the following examples, I will look at tests from Students A and B and discuss how I used this test to inform their individual instruction.
Additional Information
Additional Information
There was also an additional verbal reading portion of this test, as mentioned in the individual conclusions. It is administered one on one. None of my students were able to complete it the first time this benchmark was given, as they have not yet learned all letter sounds or how to blend. Here is the rubric and student template, as well as an explanation of what students are expect to be able to do by the end of the year.
Students receive one point for each CVC word read aloud, and up to seven points for reading each word in the short sentence correctly. By the end of the year, I hope for all of my students to be able to pass this portion of the test. When this test is administered a second time mid-way through the year, this will be crucial in understanding how students are progressing with blending, and will be useful to communicate student areas of growth to parents.
Once this test is administered again, I will also use this information to consider if I have addressed blending skills sufficiently in class during whole group phonics. If more than half of my students are still unable to blend at least one word, then I will reteach this skill and add additional practice into our morning meeting time to make sure all students have adequate opportunities to practice.
I will also use this individualized information to make sure that students are still in the correct guided reading groups based off of skill ability. My guided reading groups are fluid and if a student is in a group where their group-mates have mastered CVC blending while they have not, I may move the struggling student to another group still working on this skill. Then I will be able to target just CVC blending during a few days of small group instruction with struggling students to give them more chances to practice.
Conclusion
Conclusion
This diagnostic test is given multiple times per year in the same state, and can be used to gage if instruction is effective in helping students reach end of year goals. The skills that my students must demonstrate to achieve full points on this assessment by the end of the year are skills that relate to phonics, reading, writing, and comprehension. This assessment is useful to inform instruction because it covers so many all-around skills, although this data must be supplemented with formative data from observations as well as data from other summative tests like the District Benchmark because each skill is tested in a limited capacity. It is only through combining results from a variety of sources that teachers can get a full perspective on student abilities and understand necessary next steps.
Page updated
Report abuse