Advanced Problem Analysis in Reading: Curriculum Based Evaluation & other functional academic assessments Indian Prairie District 204 Problem Solving October,
Post on 23-Dec-2015
217 Views
Preview:
Transcript
Advanced Problem Analysis in Reading:
Curriculum Based Evaluation & other functional academic assessments
Indian Prairie District 204Problem Solving
October, 2008
Acknowledgements
• Kerry Bollman: NASP & Flex West CBE presentations
• Sue Gallagher: Flex West CBE presentations• Madi Phillips: NSSED presentations• Heartland AEA 11, Des Moines, Iowa• Ken Howell & Victor Nolet : CBE book• Joe Witt: STEEP Model/1 minute Academic
Assessment• Ed Shapiro: Academic Skills Problems• Ed Daly: Functional Analysis of Academics
Objectives
• State the fundamental components of functional academic assessment, including CBE
• Be introduced to some of the basic skills involved in CBE and advanced problem analysis in reading
• Practice the thought process through training exercises
Agenda
• Overview of CBE as thought process 12:00-
12:45– How is this similar to or different from your previous thinking related to CBE?
• Jigsaw Activity 12:45-
1:45
– In letter group – read sections, create summary with visuals– In number group – jigsaw through each section, teaching the other members of your
group
• The Flowcharts 1:45-2:30
• Examples Activity 2:15-
3:30
The Problem Solving Process
• Implement Plan
Carry out the intervention
• EvaluateDid our plan
work?
• Define the Problem
What is the problem and why is it happening?
• Develop a PlanWhat are we going to do?
Curriculum Based Evaluation• A process of evaluation and decision making
that may use CBM or other derivations of CBA with the goal of maximizing student learning.
• Core components – comparison, judgment, and problem-solving - not measurement
• Decision-making framework for thinking • A network of curriculum-driven if/then precepts
• Howell, Hosp, & Kurns (2008), BPV Chapter 20.
CBE and CBM: How they work together within problem solving
The Problemexpecte
dactual
CB
ECBM
Mon
itor
Why?Problem AnalysisWhy?
Intervention
CBM
Assessment Guidelines1. Must be aligned with the curriculum2. Must be easy to use3. Must have clearly defined purposes4. Should be standardized5. Should sample clearly defined content domains6. Should assess relevant types of knowledge7. Some should collect rate data8. Should collect an adequate sample9. Should use appropriate scoring rules10. Some should be complex and interactive
– Howell & Nolet (2000) p 148
Procedures for Assessing Academic Skills
Structured Teacher Interview & Rating Scales
Direct Classroom
Observation
StudentInterview
PermanentProductReview
Curriculum-Based Assessment of Academic Skills
Ed Shapiro (2004)
Can’t Do vs. Won’t Do1. Obtain 3 previously completed assignments. Each
should be one which the student has performed much below expectations.2. Present first assignment (answers removed) with incentive. If increases score by 25% or scores 80% or above, then move to next step.3. Have student choose reinforcers (teacher approved) that he/she would like to work for in the future.4. Test by presenting another assignment with a reinforcer to the student. 5. Evaluate outcomes. If student markedly increases performance when offered incentives, likely WON’T DO.6. Create incentive plan.
Joe Witt & Ray Beck, 2001Ed Daly, 1999
Adding in Can’t Do vs. Won’t DoStep 1: Can’t DoAssess thru Review
Low Performance?
No?Stop
Yes?Step 2: Won’t Do
InterviewReassess
Motivator
PerformanceImproved?
Yes?Stop
No?Step 3: CIE
Assess Curriculum,Instruction,
Environment
Step 4: SLA’sSurvey Level &
Specific Level Assessments
Needs?
No?Stop
Yes?Provide appropriate intervention
C.Martin, 2005
CBE
The CBE Process of Inquiry
• Step 1: Fact-Finding & Problem Validation
• Step 2: Develop Assumed Causes
• Step 3: Validating
• Step 4: Summative Decision Making
• Step 5: Formative Decision Making
Howell, Hosp, & Kurns (2008), BPV Chapter 20
Can you define
the problem?
Can you validate
the problem?
Summarize results
Select & conduct
screening assessments
Yes No
No
Set the goal(s)
Can you plan instruction?
Generate assumed
causesPlan &
conduct assessments Summarize
results
No
Yes
Were assumed
causes validated?
Yes
No
Yes
Design & implement instruction Progress monitor
Make formative decisions
Problem Identification
Hypothesis
Test Hypothesis
Hypothesis true?Design Instruction
Progress Monitor& Plan Evaluation
Appropriate Development of Assumed Cause
Fact Assumed Cause
Test Result
Difference between what student is doing and what’s expected
What we think the reason for the problem might be
How we will confirm the assumed cause
Was the assumed cause confirmed?
F AC T R
Rules for Developing Assumed Causes
• Clarify the purpose– If entitlement, then
student-to-group comparison needed
– If what to teach, then current performance to expected performance comparison needed
– If how to teach, then formative data needed to determine effectiveness
• Target relevant information– Alterable variables– Essential characteristics
• Think about instruction– Information/data can’t
focus exclusively on student
– ICEL– Formative
Howell, Hosp, & Kurns (2008), BPV Chapter 20
• Think about the Curriculum– Skill sequences– Proficiency– Response type– Conditions
• Think about Types of Knowledge & Beyond Knowing How– When, why, & under what
circumstances skill should be used
• Check the Student’s Awareness of Skills– Self-monitoring, self-
control, metacognition– Ask to rate task difficulty
before doing
• TEST DOWN/TEACH UP– Expected level first– Then work backward
Rules for Developing Assumed Causes
Howell, Hosp, & Kurns (2008), BPV Chapter 20
• Pick the Most Likely Targets First– The most likely
explanation for the student’s lack of proficiency with a skill, or the most likely solution for the problem, should be checked before going on to those that are more complex or exotic.
Rules for Developing Assumed Causes
Howell, Hosp, & Kurns (2008), BPV Chapter 20
READING
Early Reading Advanced Reading
Fluency + Accuracy +
Comprehension +
Fluency + Accuracy +
Comprehension -
Fluency +
Accuracy –
Fluency –
Accuracy +
Fluency –
Accuracy –
Re-Screen In 4 Mos. MAZE Pencil Tap Re-Read SLA
K.Bollman, 2006
Activity• Beginning Reading - “Learning to Read”
– Group 1: Read “Phonological Awareness” pp.378-380 & “Phoneme Segmentation Fluency” p.385; Review curriculum maps
– Group 2: Read “Alphabetic Principle” pp.380-381 & “Letter Sound Fluency” & “Nonsense Word Fluency” p. 385; Review curriculum maps
– Group 3: Read “Accuracy & Fluency” pp.381 & “Word Identification Fluency” & “Oral Reading Fluency” pp. 385-386; Review curriculum maps
• Advanced Reading - “Reading to Learn”– Group 1: Read “Content of the Reading-Decoding Strand”, “Content of the
Prior/Background Knowledge Strand” pp.400-401 & “Cloze and Maze”, “ORF” pp.404-405
– Group 2: Read “Content of the Vocabulary Strand” pp.400-402, “Review of Text-Dependent Grades and Assignments” pp.405-405, “Vocabulary Matching” p.406
– Group 3: Read “Content of the Comprehension Strategy Strand” pp.402-403, Written and Oral Retell Measures, Think-Aloud Interview pp.406-407
Early Reading FlowchartAre reading
skills acceptable?
R – Curriculum, Permanent Products I – TeacherO – Student while readingT – Using CBM
Are oral reading
skills acceptable?
Go to Comprehension
K-2 or older student
who decodes
few words?
Survey Early Literacy
Skills
Missing early
literacy skills?
Is oral reading accurate
but slow? Do Rereading
assmt
Did rate increase?
Build Fluency
w/ rereading
yes
noyes
no
yes
Do Error Sample & Analysis
no
Do Pencil Tap
Did accuracy improve?
Build Self Monitoring
no
yes
noMore errors on harder passages?
Provide Balanced
Instruction
noCategorize errors yes
Are there patterns? no
Correct Patterns
Yes, whole word
Evaluate phonics
Yes, Phonics patterns
Primary Measures for Early Reading
• Phoneme Segmentation Fluency• Letter Sound Fluency• Nonsense Word Fluency• Word Identification Fluency• R-CBM (ORF)
R-CBM for general reading measureCriteria:
Grade Pass Unsure No-PassEarly 1st +35 wrc 25-35 wrc - 25 wrcLate 1st +50 wrc 40-50 wrc - 40 wrcEarly 2nd +70 wrc 50-70 wrc - 50 wrcLate 2nd +100 wrc 80-100 wrc - 80 wrcEarly 3rd +120 wrc 100-120 wrc - 100 wrcLate 3rd &above
+140 wrc 100-140 wrc - 100 wrc
Accuracy + 95% 90-95% - 90%
Basic Reading & Comprehension
Early Reading Risk IndicatorsCritical Reading Element
High-priority skill Assessmt Benchmark Time of Benchmark
Risk indicator in fall
Phonemic awareness
Phoneme segmenting
PSF 35 cppm Spring of K <10
Alphabetic principle
Letter soundsLetter sounds/decoding
LSFNWF
40 clspm40 clspm
Spring of KWin of 1st
<10<30
Accuracy & Fluency
Sight word reading
WIF 60 cwpm Spring of 1st <15
General Assessment Guide Slow Rate & Poor Accuracy = Survey Level Assessment & Phonics/Phonemic Aw Assessments Slow Rate but Adequate Accuracy = Reread Assessmt Adequate Rate but Poor Accuracy = Pencil Tap Assessmt Adequate Rate & Adequate Accuracy, Rdg Comp but Poor Comprehension = Survey & Rdg
Assessmt Guide
Reading at least 40 wrc in 1st grade material?
YESProvide instruction
at instructional level withemphasis on phonics & fluency
NOProvide intensive phonicsand phonemic awareness
instruction
Early Reading
Intervention suggestions
Direct Instruction•Corrective Reading•Horizons•Reading Mastery
REWARDSRead Well
Early Literacy Skills
•Phonemic awareness•Blending•Segmenting•Manipulation
•Identifying•Sounds•Rhyming
•Concepts of print•Page conventions•Word/sentence/book length & boundaries•Environmental print/logos
Phonological Awareness Assessment
Rhyming & song
Sentence segmentation
Syllable segmentation & blending
Onset rime segmentation & blending
Phoneme blending & segmentation
Less complex
Morecomplex
Intervention suggestions
EarobicsSounds & LettersK-PALSGreat LeapsRoad to the CodeScott Foresman Early Reading InterventionLindamood Bell LiPS Program
Checking for Decoding Skill…• Have the student read a grade level
passage aloud
• Write down each incorrectly read word on a piece of paper
• Have the student attempt to read each incorrectly read word in isolation from your paper
• Can the student correctly decode words in isolation?
Analyzing Errors in Reading
• Select a passage you estimate that the student will read with about 80-85% accuracy. – Remember: 80% accuracy = 1 error every 5
words!– Try different levels of passage until you find
the right fit– You will need at least 50 errors for kids
grades 2 & above (25 errors for grade 1) • Passage will need to be 250 words or more
Pattern of Error Types
• Compare each error in the passage with the Error Pattern Checklist
• Make a mark next to the category in which the error seems to fit
• Come up with a total of all errors
• Identify the categories in which most errors occur
Re-read strategyStudent reads for 2-minutes, note # wrc at end of the 1st minute.Say, NOW READ AGAIN AS QUICKLY AND ACCURATELY AS YOU CAN.Student reads for 1-minute, determine wrc.Compare 1st read to 2nd read scores
Basic Reading
Rate improved by approximately 25%?
YESUse a fluency building
Intervention(re-reading)
NORecheck phonics
Needs andCan’t Do/Won’t Do
Basic Reading
Intervention suggestions
Re-reading techniquesSoar to SuccessRead NaturallyPALSGreat LeapsSix Minute SolutionQuick ReadsChoral readingCloze reading
Pencil Tap• Using passage where student is approximately 85% accurate, tell student to try and fix the word every time you tap the table• Count the number of self-corrections student makes• Compare to total number of errors
Basic Reading
Determine if student has skills to correct errors using the pencil tap test (assisted monitoring)
“Whenever you make an error, I’m going to tap the table with my pen. When I tap the table,
I want you to fix the error.”
• If student can fix errors when you point them out, you know he/she has the decoding skills to read the passage, but needs assistance learning to self-monitor for accuracy. Intervene with strategies for self-monitoring decoding.
• If the student cannot fix errors when you point them out, a skill deficit in decoding may be indicated. Further analyze errors to isolate patterns of difficulty, and intervene with targeted decoding strategies.
Self-corrected majority of errors?
YESUse self-monitoring
intervention
NOReassessCan’t Do/Won’t Do
Basic Reading
Interventions
Design an intervention to increase attentionto accuracy.
•Does this make sense?•Does it match what is on the page?•Reinforcement for accuracy•Goal setting & progress monitoring
If did not make more errors on more difficult passages,use intensified balanced instruction.If did make more errors, categorize the errors, look forpatterns, and correct.
Interventions (cont.)
Spelling through MorphographsWord sorting/word studyGreat LeapsREWARDSMaking sense of phonicsPhonics and Spelling through Grapheme MappingSoundabet
Primary Measures for Advanced ReadingMeasure Survey-Level Purpose •Specific-Level Purpose •Domains Sampled
Expository Maze & Close Qtrly benchmark measureScreening
•Check decoding•Check background knowledge•Text leveling & selection•Assessing vocab knowl•Assessing lang skills relative to text demands
•Comprehension•Vocabulary•Decoding•Syntax
R-CBM (ORF) ScreeningInitial indication of understanding
•Check decoding•Text leveling & selection•To rule out decoding problems
•Decoding•Comprehension
Review of grades & feedback on text-dependent tests & classes
Initial indication of understandingScreeningQtrly benchmark measure
•Pattern recognition by text type or assignment type•To discriminate global from subject-specific problems
•Application of advanced reading•Metacognitive strategy use
Vocabulary matching •Check vocabulary accuracy•Find level of academic words•Find level of subject-specific words•Assessing vocab knowledge•Progress monitoring
•Vocabulary
Retell Initial indication of understanding
•Check embedded strategy knowledge•Look for pattern in attention to sample use of terminology
•Prior background knowledge•Comprehension•Decoding•Vocabulary•Metacognitive strategy
Think-aloud sessions •Check embedded strategy knowledge•Check metacognitive knowledge•Strategy evaluation•Evaluation of metacognitive content
•Metacognitive strategy•Task-specific strategy
Research Behind the Vocabulary-Matching Measures
Christine Espin – University of MinnesotaOur research team at the University of Minnesota has conducted a series of studies to examine the reliability and validity of vocabulary matching as an indicator of content-area learning. The results of this research show that the vocabulary-matching measure is a valid and reliable indicator of performance and progress in social studies and science. Performance on the vocabulary-matching measure is related to performance on other content-area tasks, including research-made content tests, content-area subtests of standardized achievement tests, and teacher-made content measures. In addition, students who grow more on the vocabulary-matching measures score higher on criterion measures of content-area performance. As an aside, our research also shows that students must read the measures themselves (as opposed to having the measures read to them by the examiner) to obtain reliable and valid growth rates.
http://www.teachingld.org/expert_connection/cbm.html
Creating Vocabulary-Matching Probes•Create a pool of potential vocabulary terms. Develop a pool of important vocabulary terms from the content to be covered over the entire school year (or semester if the class is offered on a semester basis.) Terms can be selected from the classroom textbook, from teacher notes and lectures, or from both sources. Selected terms should be germane to the content being covered. If the textbook is fairly representative of the content being covered, the terms can be created from the glossary of the textbook or from terms in the text that are highlighted or italicized.•Develop definitions for each term. For each term, develop a short definition. The easiest method for developing definitions is to use the glossary of the textbook. Other methods are to rely on teachers' notes and lectures or to use a school-based dictionary. Limit the length of each definition to approximately 15 words. Make them clear and unambiguous.•Create weekly measures that are similar. For each measure, randomly select 20 terms and definitions from the pool created in steps 1 and 2. In addition, select two definitions that do not match any of the terms. Thus, each probe will have 20 terms and 22 definitions.
One practical way to develop the measures is to write each vocabulary term on the front of an index card with its definition on the back. For each measure, shuffle all of the cards, and randomly select terms and definitions. Place the terms on the left-hand side of the page and the definitions in random order on the right-hand side. Number the terms, leaving a blank space by each term; put letters by each definition. The students write the letter for the correct definition in the blank next to each term.
http://www.teachingld.org/expert_connection/cbm.html
Excerpts from example of teacher selected word lists
Grade Level: 6thDepartment: Language Arts
Word Definition
Ambiguous Having two or more meanings
Archenemy A chief rival
Benevolence An inclination to do good
Biopic A film dramatizing the life of a famous person
Cyclical Occurring in cycles
Deviate To turn away from a course, path, or topic
Digress To stray from the subject in speaking or writing
Aqueduct A bridge-like structure that carries water
Department: Math
Word Definition
Circumference Measure of the distance around a circle
Transversal A line that crosses two or more other lines
Decagon A closed figure with ten sides and ten angles
Perimeter The measure of the distance around a figure
Diameter A line segment that divides a circle into two equal parts
11. Go to: DataSort. Sort by ‘(2)Leave Blank! and make sure Ascending his clicked. Hit ok.
12. Now your definitions are in random order. Don’t worry, the correct word has been moved with it.
Probe Generator Template
Retell
Reader retelling profile
• Student reads a complete passage at instructional level
• Student then orally or in writing retells the passage content
• Examiner uses matrix for scoring the components retold
Comprehension Status Sheet• Information gathering tool to assist with identifying
causes of comprehension concern– Anyone with direct knowledge of the student’s skills may be
invited to a meeting to discuss this status sheet– Purpose of the meeting is to limit the field of inquiry by ruling
out what we already know about the student’s skills• In interview/discussion format, go through each of the
primary categories and mark the appropriate status (pass, unsure, no pass)– Indicators listed below each category exist only to
help define the categories• You can still mark pass for a category if not all indicators
accurately describe the student; you can still mark no pass for a category even if some indicators accurately describe the student
Does the Student Monitor Meaning?
Does the student display selective attention to text?
Does the student adjust for task difficulty?
Does the student connect text to prior knowledge?
Does the student clarify?
YES NO UNSURE YES NO UNSURE YES NO UNSURE YES NO UNSURE YES NO UNSURE
Student self-corrects errors that violate the meaning of the text
Student self-corrects errors that violate the meaning of the text
Student self-corrects errors that violate the meaning of text
Student answers best title and main idea questions accurately
Student self corrects errors that violate the meaning of the text
Student rereads confusing portions of material
Student adjusts reading pace for task difficulty
Student can identify purpose for reading (i.e., information vs. entertainment)
Student retells story with emphasis on major points
Student adjusts reading pace for task difficulty
Student makes logical predictions about upcoming text
Student connects information from current text with prior knowledge
Student adjusts reading pace for task difficulty
Student can describe authorÕs purpose for writing
Student can answer text dependent questions not based on prior knowledge
Student can identify when additional information is needed
Student makes use of what he already knows or believes about the information in the text to sort portions of the message for reflection and storage
Student can locate information in passages to answer questions without rereading whole passage
Student identifies characters, descriptions, actions, conflicts, resolutions, important details
Student can accurately judge the value or credibility of the information source (entertainment vs. informative)
Student uses multiple strategies to decode words
Student asks for help when necessary
Student reads with appropriate expression
Student is able to disregard material that is not critical to the focus of the passage
Student employs comprehension monitoring strategies in the face of difficult or poorly written text
Student can identify supporting information Student can use multiple
strategies to determine the meaning of text (create questions, reread, take notes, underlineÉ)
Metacognitive Strategies Status Sheet
Status Sheet Interpretation
• Assume that those categories marked Pass are skill areas in which problems do not exist.– Monitoring for maintenance and generalization
may be done, but no other action is indicated• Categories marked No Pass are those
where interventions should be developed• Categories marked Unsure are those
where additional information is required to evaluate the student’s skill - proceed to CBE specific level procedures
Reading Comprehension
Monitoring Meaning
Retell
Awareness of Reading
Prior Knowledge
Vocabulary
Knowledge of Text Structure & Grammar
Analyzing Errors in Meaning
• Have the student read the passage out loud to you
• Keep careful notes of all errors made & exactly what the student said
• It may be helpful to tape record so you can go back and fill in your notes.
Analyzing Errors in Reading
• Three types of analyses
– What % of errors are meaning violating
– What pattern of reading error types are
made
– What pattern of decoding content errors
are made
% Meaning Violating Errors
• Review existing data to determine if errors violate meaning
Example text:
“They are such smiling happy girls.”
Meaning preserving error:
“They are such smiley happy girls.”
Meaning violating error:
“They are such smelling happy girls.”
% Meaning Violating Errors
• Tally each error as:– Meaning Violating– Meaning Preserving– Not Sure
• Circle the tally mark if the student self corrected
• Use pencil tap to determine self-corrects
Intervention suggestions
Pencil tap as interventionRepeated readingsStudents ask
•Does this make sense?•Does it fit with what I have been reading?•Does it fit with what is on the page?
Awareness of Reading Process
Metacomprehension Strategy Index
• Student completes index
• Compare answers to the key
Prior Knowledge
• Collect 4 reading maze or cloze passages.• Administer first two using standard format• Average the scores• Administer second two after discussing the topic (do not teach the content – just try to prime student’s recall about the topic)• Average these scores• If student’s scores improve by at least 50% or if meet criterion (85% maze; 50% cloze), then prior knowledge is likely impacting comprehension
Intervention suggestions
Teach active and reflective readingPre-reading questioningAnticipation guides
Vocabulary
• Ask student to identify important vocabulary words prior to reading passage
• Test the student’s knowledge of academic vocabulary
Intervention suggestions
Soar to SuccessBe careful of decontextualized programsNot dictionariesNot decodable booksStart with basic words, then high frequency words,then low frequency
Knowledge of Text Structure/Grammar
• Check oral language skills
• Does student accurately make predictions?
• Does he/she know what words such as he, she, or their refers to?
• Has student been exposed to a variety of text structures?
Intervention suggestions
• Highlight important features of text• Mark up passages to show what words pronouns refer to• Language interventions• Provide exposure to a variety of text structures
Carly - Kindergarten
•Review•Carly did not recognize any letters at her Fall Kindergarten screening
•Interview•Teacher notes that Carly’s class has been working on various literacy activities with one new letter per week for 30 minutes per day since the beginning of the school year
•Observe•Test
•Winter Kindergarten screening update•Carly does not recognize any letters
Henry, Grade 1•(R) Previous records:
•Kindergarten screening results appeared normal•Teacher comments on report card indicate difficulty letter identification (end of year had 16 letters mastered), but note good rhyming skills
• (I) Teacher:•Henry currently receives 30 minutes/day systematic phonics instruction based on word families
•(O) Henry in class:•On task time during teacher led instruction and independent seat work is commensurate with peers
•(T) Fall DIBELS Scores•LNF = 18, PSF = 48, NWF = 1•Criterion for Fall = PSF > 35, Winter = NWF > 50•50th percentile scores: LNF = 42, PSF = 36, NWF = 27
Bart, Grade 2•Review
•No previous reading services, no teacher comments on past report cards regarding reading.
•Interview•Parents haven’t noticed a concern, but note that Bart “never chooses” to read at home•Teacher states that Bart successfully uses decoding strategies
•Observe•Bart during a round robin reading activity in class. Bart self corrects all but 1 error across 3 paragraphs he reads.
•Test•Fall Reading CBM scores
•48 WRC, 1 error•50th percentile = 77 WRC, 2 errors
Rachel, Grade 3
•Review•Old DIBELS data: never met criteria for Nonsense Word Fluency •Report card comments “star reader” in grade 1•Has received speech therapy since 3 years old
•Interview•2nd grade teacher noted that Rachel likes to be a “good fast reader.”
•Observe•Test
•Fall CBM scores•107 WRC, 11 errors•50th percentile = 102, 3 errors
Ellie, Grade 4•Review
•Report card history indicates difficulty in reading•Participated in “high flyers” reading support group in 1st
and 2nd grades•Low scores on current reading comprehension class work
•Interview•Ellie reports she is an “ok reader”, but doesn’t remember what she reads
•Observe•Test
•Fall Reading CBM scores:•Grade 4 text – 61 WRC, 10 errors•50th percentile scores = 131 WRC, 3 errors
Jack, Grade 6•Review
•Past testing indicates adequate listening comprehension skills
•Interview•Teacher reports that Jack does not seem to remember anything that he reads
•Observe•When Jack reads in class, it sounds very mechanical and unnatural
•Test•Fall CBM scores
•160 WRC, 4 errors•50th percentile = 142, 1 error
Jeff, Grade 7•Review
•Good attendance, has attended school in same district since 2nd grade, average to below average grades
•Interview•Teacher says that he reads at 3rd grade level, difficulties in all areas but listening comprehension is fine, Jeff says he likes reading silently better than reading aloud
•Observe•Jeff got no time to read with feedback during a language arts class
•Test•Fall CBM scores
•58 WRC, 7 errors•50th percentile = 136 wrc
top related