Focusing on Assessment: So What Do They Really Know?

I am going to wrap up my Focusing on Assessment series of blog posts with a review of Cris Tovani's So What Do They Really Know?: Assessment That Informs Teaching and Learning. Tovani's voice captured my interest in 2006 when my mentor gave me a copy of her I Read It, But I Don't Get It.  Needless to say, I was very excited to hear that she had another book coming out!

Once again, her voice resonated with me throughout the book. While reading, it is easy to tell that she is a master teacher who thinks reflectively about her teaching throughout the years. I appreciate that she doesn't buckle to the pressure to do certain aspects exactly the same as some of her colleagues, but rather, she takes criticism/suggestions as something to reflect about and consider what is truly the best for her students.

Tovani started out the book talking about the current context of education and views of assessment. She also provided some thought provoking scenarios to consider the question stated in the title. This was a nice way to frame the rest of the text. Then she continued on to highlight how she uses assessment in her classroom, as well as providing insights into the journey that led up to the decisions she has made about assessments. Her assessment ideas are practical and serve multiple purposes, such as building connections with students, while also considering what instruction they need next the most, reflecting her belief about the connection between assessments and the value in getting to know students. Throughout she provided many examples of her students' actual responses, while providing glimpses into her thought process related to the specific responses. Her writing provides a vivid picture of how her classroom operates.

One of my favorite statements from the book stood out because it closely aligns with how I feel, stating, "Grading. I hate it. As a teacher, it is what I wrestle with most. I know it is one of the necessary evils of the job, but I find myself constantly struggling with issues of management and equity," (p. 129). No matter the grade level, I always "wrestle" with this as well. I was excited to read this chapter toward the end of the book to see how she responds to this struggle. I think that captures well why I love Tovani's writing in general - I can connect with her so much and I look forward to the "conversation" that I will have with her through reading her books, viewing her as a valued mentor.

Happy New Year! Enjoy continuing to think about assessments in 2012!

Focusing on Assessment: Accessible Assessment for Older Grades

Earlier this week I wrote about how much I love the new resource, Accessible Assessment. I mentioned that it is recommended for grades 2-6, but that I would share ideas for using it in 6th-12th grade, as the resource still has a lot to offer for older grades.

Here are a few reasons why the resource is still relevant for older readers:

• The level of reflection that it supports is valuable for teachers at all levels to consider how they can closely examine how mindfully and intentionally they are using (or not using) assessments
• The concept that reading assessments should consider affective, global, and local assessments, rather than a more narrow view is still applicable
• The resource has flexibility to select from their provided assessments or adapt
• The resource provides an excellent framework for planning assessment throughout the year and recording data in a way that is manageable. Even if some aspects with the actual assessments need to be adapted for older grades, the helpful framework is still relevant.

While reading I could tell that some aspects were more appropriate for younger readers; yet, I thought about how that is where adaptation and/or differentiation comes in. For example, many adolescent readers that I have worked with did not need support with phonics, so I would not administer their local assessment related to this area to all students. In fact, even the authors recommend optimal grade levels to administer the assessment, rather than for all grades. Instead, it would be an aspect that I would keep in mind that may impact some of my older readers. When I notice that potential need for further support, then I would have ideas for assessments that may be appropriate. 

Another potential adaptation that I thought of as reading is that the authors provide a Reading Attitude and Identity Survey. It seemed very familiar to another survey that I was familiar with and previously used with my students, Adolescent Motivation to Read Profile (Pitcher et al., 2007), which was adapted from Gambrell et. al (1996). Once I double checked the article that talked about the adolescent version, I realized that they were similar because the survey provided in Accessible Assessment was also adapted from Gambrell et. al (1996) as well. Thus, teachers of adolescents who want to use the concept of being more cognizant of affective aspects in their classrooms could use or adapt the AMRP, rather than using the survey provided in the book. However, they could still use the rationale and suggestions of how to organize the data and consider teaching implications from Accessible Assessment.

The grade level reading passages included in Accessible Assessment only provide two passages each for grades 2-5, so this is another area that would need to be adapted for older readers. For the last few years I used QRI in my classroom. It provides a lot of informative information but can also be time-consuming. I had already made decisions, as suggested in the QRI text, in order to decide how I wanted to use the tool since it would be way too time-consuming to use it to its full capabilities with every single student; nonetheless, conducting QRIs still used quite a bit of class time. However, when reading Accessible Assessments, I liked some of their ideas about grade-level passages that aligned with their over-all concept of manageable assessments. Since the passages included with the resource would not be appropriate for most older readers, I would suggest trying out some of their ideas with grade-level passages from other resources. 

Overall, the underlying philosophy and beliefs behind Accessible Assessment, as well as the level of deep conversations that it inspires, transcend a wide range of age groups. This post contains a few of my thoughts on how I would utilize the resource with adolescents. While I pointed out some aspects that would need to be adapted for older students, there were many other ideas that would still be appropriate for older readers without adapting. Many aspects would nicely weave into the conferring portion of reading workshop. I am sure that other secondary teachers would also notice the value and would be able to add valuable contributions to an on-going discussion about assessment at the secondary level.

Articles cited:

Gambrell, L. B., Palmer, B. M., Codling, R. M., & Mazzoni, S. A. (1996). Assessing motivation to read. The Reading Teacher, 49, 518-533.

Pitcher, S. M., Albright, L. K., DeLaney, C. J., Walker, N. T., Seunarinesingh, K., Mogge, S. ... Dunston, P.J. (2007). Assessing adolescents' motivation to read. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 50(5), 378-396.

Focusing on Assessment: Accessible Assessment

I read Accessible Assessment: How 9 Sensible Techniques Can Power DATA-DRIVEN Reading Instruction in order to consider recommendation for inclusion as a required text for coursework at my university. When I first heard about the text, it captured my attention, seeming like it would be a good fit with the current context of education, including the move toward the Common Core State Standards. It also seemed to recognize the need for assessments that are meaningful and manageable. Furthermore, information I read about the book provided glimpses into the scope of the assessments, ranging from affective, global, and local, an aspect that stood out, knowing that they were not narrowly defining what counts for readers. I knew that I would want to take a close look at this resource because if it was as good as it sounded, it would have so much potential.

The back cover states, "Accessible Assessment isn't like many of today's complex, time-consuming assessment programs. It combines nine informal techniques into a manageable, calendarized framework that makes sense and drives highly targeted, differentiated instruction." Once I started reading, it was easy to see that the back cover provided a very accurate description.

Another asset of the text is the strong underlying layers of support for rich discussions. Not only did the authors outline their ideas and provide rationales for the inclusion, they provided a framework and encouraged discussions for deep reflection and dialogue. They made it clear that they were not simply "selling" their assessment ideas. For example, they stated, "Users of Accessible Assessment need to keep in mind that they can decide from among the nine assessments provided, from among those they currently use, or from research-based sources to design an assessment protocol that addresses affective, global, and local knowledge" (p. xv).

The introductory section frames the rest of the book by explaining their literacy beliefs and discussing four essential questions that they bring up while discussing each of the assessments throughout the text. They also provided a strong rationale for why they think the recommended assessments can have a positive impact on teachers and students, as well as an example of how one teacher could utilize the book, modeling the active participation involved in the assessment process, rather than approaching the resource with a receptive approach.

Following the introduction, the authors detail each of the assessments in a very user-friendly, organized fashion, divided by the three types of assessments (affective, global, and local). For each individual assessment within the three sections, the authors started with their four essential questions that not only scaffold reflective teaching but also provide a rationale for the assessment. Then they provide support materials (when applicable) and clear descriptions of the assessments, as well as suggestions for how to use the data. Each of the instructional implications sections highlighted whole-group instruction, small-group reading, independent reading, and cross-content suggestions. In addition, they provided specific examples of how to make the concepts present in the classroom. The end of each section was one of my favorites - teacher and student self-assessment, yet another layer to support continual development of capacity.

The end of the book includes further explanation of the assessment beliefs that drove their decision making process while creating this resource, drawing from research and experience. The following statement caught my attention, "The beliefs are an out-growth of our combined eighty years of experiences that span teaching and assessing reading in grade levels and content areas from kindergarten through college, and with both novice and veteran teachers," (p. 153).

The more I read, the more I loved it and recognized the value of the resource for a range of scenarios: higher education coursework, mentoring, teaching, summer literacy camps, etc. Though the text is marketed for grades 2-6, many of the assessments would still be relevant for older students. I will write a future post about what I would recommend for 6th-12th grade teachers. Their range of experiences (highlighted in the paragraph above) are very present in the text making it truly beneficial for educators in a variety of positions and at different stages in their careers. I will be recommending the text to the director at the school where I taught the last three years and to my department for inclusion in course(s).

Focusing on Assessment: The Hook Behind the Resources

I started this post intending to write about Accessible Assessment after talking a little bit about a common thread between it and So What Do They Really Know? Yet, I realized that my writing was going in another direction. I still had more to say about just why the types of assessments we use are so vital and as a result, why both of these texts hooked me because of their close alignment to my literacy beliefs.

The current context of education definitely has a sharp focus on data and assessment, yet I am at times worried with the type of assessments that are valued and the decisions that educators make about students based on limited data and/or without considering the full student. I know that at times teachers are not allowed to control some of the decision making process, and depending on the context, they may fall anywhere on a spectrum ranging from feeling like they are treated like a technician to feeling like a professional. Yet, I still have strong beliefs that regardless of where teachers encounter themselves, the more they understand about assessment and data the better, allowing them to carefully analyze expectations and practice in order to improve as a practitioner.

My dissertation in progress is a narrative inquiry, so I have been closely analyzing and considering my personal teaching experiences including both ends of the spectrum. My third year teaching, I was in a context where I mainly taught sixth graders with scripted reading instruction with strict expectations to follow the curriculum with fidelity, leaving little room for implementing other aspects that I highly valued.

At the time I was completing a practicum for my reading endorsement, and revisiting my practicum journal has reminded me just how conflicted I felt. The way that I taught that year clashed with my personal literacy philosophy, yet I did not necessarily feel confident that I "had all the answers". I knew what I would do if given the flexibility, but I also knew that along with that, I would need to have a supportive environment that would allow for space to build capacity over time.

During that year, placements were made primarily on measures of oral reading "fluency" (narrowly defined as speed) and in-program placement tests. I knew the needs of students in my classes were very different, and Marsha Riddle Buly influenced this thought process the summer prior when she taught a course that I attended while on exchange to Mexico. She shared articles* that she had written about findings from a study she and a colleague conducted about the varied needs of students who did not meet state assessments in Washington.

Experiences with one parent in particular stand out from that year - a parent who wanted answers, wanted to know what her child truly needed to grow as a reader. She checked in with me, as well as a couple of school leaders. I did not feel that she received the information she needed to know, a true diagnostic assessment. I was able to notice a lot about her in class, but the program and in-program assessments did not really get at the big picture, and I was told to focus on instruction. However, I knew that diagnostics and instruction were intertwined. This was an area where I would want to continually grow, and I knew that in order to truly understand my students' needs and have the flexibility to adapt instruction to tailor to those needs, I needed to look for a new position.

The few years after I had the opportunity to continually build on my base of knowledge and teach in a way that aligned with all those thoughts of how I would respond to student needs if I was not bound to a scripted program. I became familiar with a wider range of assessments and data, some more helpful than others and some easier than others to manage time-wise.

Based on my experiences, that is why as I read Accessible Assessment and So What Do They Really Know? the authors' assessment philosophies stood out so much. With those thoughts in mind, I think I will be ready to continue on with a look at each of these resources in my next posts.

*References for Riddle Buly articles.
Riddle Buly, M., & Valencia, S. W. (2002). Below the bar: Profiles of students who fail state reading assessments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(3), 219-239.

Valencia, S. W., & Riddle Buly, M. (2004). Behind test scores: What struggling readers really need. The Reading Teacher, 57(6), 520-531.

Focusing on Assessment: What Really Matters?

Last week I mentioned that I would be doing a series of posts Focusing on Assessment, including thoughts about two books I just read, Accessible Assessment and So What Do They Really Know? In the next couple of days I will talk about each of these resources separately, but first I wanted to highlight one aspect that stood out right away as I was reading each of the books. Throughout the resources the intentionality behind assessments and the recognition that not all assessments and data are equally helpful for teachers was ever-present. All of the authors advocated for helpful assessments, those assessments that can truly provide teachers with data to inform instruction. 

As an educator, when reading resources, it is essential to see that the authors have an understanding of the current context of teaching and of the demands on teachers' times. The authors of both books did so. The resources were distinct, yet they had that common thread of strong convictions about why assessment is necessary and the types of assessments that they value. Ideas did not represent a narrow definition of assessment, but rather a clear understanding of various factors that teachers must consider in order to really know their students and their needs. 

Focusing on Assessment Series

Winter break is always a chance to catch my breath and to deeply reflect. This winter break I am reading different books, but a couple of the books that I am reading focus on assessment. I thought it was a perfect time of year to have a series on my blog centering around assessment.

For the last few years winter break was a time for me to read and assess writing work samples in English and in Spanish (1 in each language for each of my students). It was always time consuming to say the least, but I always loved the process because it gave me a chance to really notice and reflect on the writing in front of me, as well as what I knew about the students and insights into them as writers and readers from classroom interactions.

This year with my position in teacher preparation, I don't have any assignments to correct over the break since the term ended. Instead, I am enjoying reading, writing, and reflecting.

In this series, I will specifically focus on the following two books:

Accessible Assessment: How 9 Sensible Techniques Can Power DATA-DRIVEN Reading Instruction

So What Do They Really Know?: Assessment That Informs Teaching and Learning

Workshop Reflections: Assessments

This year has been going by so quickly and I have spent a lot of energy trying to get my workshop to run smoothly and the way I imagine it should be based on resources about workshops. It has been fun getting different components to work for me, as well as challenging to work through so many different pieces. I always want my classroom to be the way it "should" be from the start, but getting some major new components, such as workshops, in place takes time. Lately I have been starting to see glimpses of what is to come in the future, and that is what keeps me going, knowing that I am making progress. I will be reflecting about what I have been learning this year about workshop, starting with assessment.

ASSESSMENTS
Assessments was one of my biggest challenges first quarter. Students were required to hand in four published pieces for the first quarter (two in English and two in Spanish) that I assessed using our state writing rubric, and I felt comfortable with that. However, I was not as pleased with other grades that I was putting in the grade book. At the start of the year I knew that I wanted a system that would allow for flexibility since students would not always be at the same place at the same time. I came up with a rubric outlining the expectations for workshop and different grades according to how they performed in workshop. From the beginning I was not 100% sure about this being the best way to go, but I did not have any better ideas. Over time it seemed like the grades did not necessarily demonstrate what I wanted them to. Improving in this area moved to the forefront of my reflections.

With the start of second quarter I am much more comfortable with the direction I am moving with assessment in workshop. Toward the end of last quarter I finally started implementing status of the class. It has been great to have a written record of students' reading and writing behaviors. Reading Mark Overmeyer's What Student Writing Teaches Us and reading his responses to some of my questions got the gears turning to start looking at assessment from new angles. Being exposed to his thoughts came at a perfect time. I was ready for the information since I had already worked through some of the start-up challenges with workshop in general.

From the time I read Overmeyer's book, I knew that I wanted my gradebook to be more standards based, rather than a huge chunk of the grades reflecting effort/participation that my workshop grade ended up being. I just needed time to process and consider how to make this happen. I knew right away that the grade for the published pieces based on the state writing rubric needed to carry more weight in their grades.

In his Q&A with me Overmeyer mentioned that he gives points for generating ideas for personal narratives. A couple of weeks after I first read this, the way I could implement his comments finally sunk in. I realized how I want to set up my gradebook this quarter. Now, rather than trying to assign workshop grade, I will give grades based on completing specific steps in the workshop process that are directly related to the standard that we are focusing on at the time. I have the same expectations for workshop that I previously watched for in order to evaluate and assign a workshop grades, but now I have more specific requirements that I will assess. For example, we are focusing on Ideas and Content right now because I observed that it was an area that many of my students need to continue developing. In a two week block of time students are required to complete a high/low chart that we did together, gather ideas about two of the events from their charts, and then write two rough drafts. If they finish everything, then they will continue gathering ideas or writing drafts. They can either work on more personal narratives or they can write slice of life stories or articles, the two genres that we have already worked on this year. Expectations such as these will make it clearer for the students of the minimum of what they should accomplish during a time frame.

I am still processing how I can improve in the way that I am assessing in reading workshop, and I am still considering ideas from Donalyn Miller's book when thinking about that area. Her reply to my questions on her book discussion were also very helpful. I also noticed another reply that she did to a teacher stating that she only uses status of the class at the beginning, and I can see how I may move in that direction as well. In writing I think that I am almost to the point where I can make that transition.

I am excited for the way that my workshop practices are improving and know that I still have many more discoveries awaiting me the rest of this year. Every year I will always be looking for some other way to improve, but I feel like I will have so much more figured out by the start of next year that I will be fine-tuning rather than figuring out the basic design.

What Student Writing Teaches Us

This summer I loved the glimpses of Mark Overmeyer's What Student Writing Teaches Us through skimming sections of the on-line version available through Stenhouse and comments on the blog tour. I knew that eventually I wanted to read the full book. This weekend my copy arrived, and I could hardly put it down once I got started. As soon as I finished I got on-line and ordered Overmeyer's first book, as well as Carl Anderson's How's It Going?, two books I had heard a lot about.

With chapter two I was pondering the question Mark proposed, "How much time do I set aside for my students to meaningfully write each day?" (15). In this section Overmeyer commented on the value of quick writes in some settings. Lately I have been trying to re-think my writing block for my students who are pulled from my classroom to received additional writing support through special education services. Typically they are in class for word study, they are pulled out for most of workshop, and they return for our Everday Editing lessons (I decided to call all of my lessons inspired by Jeff Anderson Everyday Editing lessons because of the catchy title of one of his books). However, when it comes to the Everyday Editing phase where students look at their own writing rather than observing the writing of others, the students who were pulled out from my classroom do not have many writing samples. I wanted to see how they could get some meaningful writing in the short time frame when they are in my classroom. I loved the possibilities of quick writes to help these students to consistently produce writing even if they are not in my class for the whole writer's workshop.

In addition, this summer during the blog tour Overmeyer mentioned the value of prompts and quick writes, so I had an idea to have Free Flowing Friday where students would write from a prompt each Friday. I have not been able to layer this into my writing block yet, but the book reminded me that it could be a very beneficial portion of my instruction. I appreciate Overmeyer's distinction of "framed" choice promps where "there are many possibilities within the story idea" (19). I will keep this concept in mind as I develop prompts for my students, whether they are for students returning from pull-outs or for Free Flowing Friday.

When discussing rubrics and possible pitfalls, Overmeyer stated, "As with so many issues in education, the tool is not the problem or the solution. Great tools can be misused, and marginal tools can elevate thinking in a well-run classroom," (47). I loved this reminder of the importance of always being cognizant about why we have the practices we do and making sure that we are utilizing our resources (including valuable instructional time) in the best way possible.

Many of what Overmeyer suggests reminds me of the philosophy of my university writing lab. When I first took the course to become a writing tutor I had no idea how influential it would be in my formation as a writing teacher. It was heavily emphasized to first comment on an improvement students could make globally (such as ideas, content, organization) and then move on to a local issue (such as conventions) in later drafts. The key of not pointing out every mistake/place where there was room for improvement was also emphasized. Overmeyer said, "When I read student work, I notice something to praise, and I look for something to wonder about, and then I look for teaching points," (48). Later he mentioned, "I chose to tell him what he was doing well and to pinpoint one thing he could work on," (86). I always love comments that remind me of the essentials I learned through the writing lab.

The chapter that stuck with me the most and that is really making me consider how I can improve was about grading. This quarter my students' language arts grades are mainly composed of workshop participation (rubric), home reading log, writing samples, Everyday Editing activities, word study, book clubs, and small group assignments. However, I am not completely satisfied with how student scores average out and translate into grades. Overmeyer's comments about standards-based grading sparked an interest to dig deeper into the topic and to consider possibilities for improving in this area. I appreciate how standards-based grades provide more clarity about where students are at according to state standards, as well as providing multiple opportunities throughout the marking period to demonstrate competencies. Another important focus of the chapter was fostering a community of writers that focus more on improving as writers than on their grades (91). In one way or another I will definitely be adjusting my grading practices next quarter to incorporate standards-based concepts.

There were so many great ideas in Overmeyer's book. I was excited to see the Stenhouse post announcing access to a webcast Overmeyer did earlier this year focusing on his key concept of admiring student work. I cannot wait to see it. I will be referring back to the book in the future to reevaluate my practice and refocus as needed.

MAP Assessment

This year our school will be starting to use a new assessment, MAP. Friday we had our initial training, and I am excited about the possibilities. The computer based assessment is adaptive, so it adjusts to the students level. Unlike the state assessment that only shows how my students are doing at grade-level, this assessment will give me strand data at the students' instructional levels. The program also has many very user friendly and helpful ways to present data, as well as a student goal sheet. Next year it will be nice to start with this at the beginning of the year, but for this year we will be having students take the assessments as soon as it is all set-up.

An initial thought is that I may advocate for giving this assessment three times a year, rather than conducting QRIs three times annually. This assessment will only take about one block of instructional time, as opposed to the weeks it takes to do one on one QRIs. I would still want to utilize the QRI with some students, as needed and to see one more piece.

I am looking forward to having access to an efficient and valuable new avenue for discovering data about my students. As a staff we find having this tool valuable to help triangulate data. Now I will have state assessment data (students can take state assessments up to three times/year, except writing and English Language Proficiency), MAP, QRI, and classroom observations/data. I always love finding one more way to get a fuller picture of who my students are as readers, writers, and learners.