Identifying Students Who Need Additional Instructional Support and Planning Support IBR II Cohort B September 28 and 29, 2005.

Identifying Students Who Need Additional

Instructional Support and Planning Support

IBR IICohort B

September 28 and 29, 2005

2

Oregon Reading FirstInstitutes on Beginning Reading

Content developed by:

Edward J. Kame’enui, Ph. D. Deborah C. Simmons, Ph. D.Professor, College of Education Professor, College of EducationUniversity of Oregon University of Oregon

Beth Harn, Ph.D. Michael D. Coyne, Ph. D. University of Oregon University of Connecticut

David Chard, Ph. D.University of Oregon

Additional support:

Patrick Kennedy-PaineKatie Tate Nicole Sherman-Brewer University of Oregon Oregon Reading First

3

Cohort B, IBR II, Content Development

Content developed by:

Carrie Thomas Beck Jeanie Mercier SmithHank FienPat Nash

Additional support:

Katie Tate

4

Acknowledgments

• Oregon Department of Education

• Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement, College of Education, University of Oregon

– This presentation was modified from the presentation entitled: Instructional Implications: Interpreting Student Performance Data from IBR III (Simmons & Harn, 2004)

• U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education

Programs

5

Copyright

• All materials are protected by copyright and should not be reproduced or used without expressed permission of Dr. Carrie Thomas Beck, Oregon Reading First Center. Selected slides were reproduced from other sources and original references cited.

Simmons & Harn © 2004 6

For Each

Student

Instruction

GoalsAssessment

For All Students

Ongoing Progress Monitoring and Differentiated and

Individualized Instruction for Each Student

A Schoolwide Beginning Reading Model

Identifying Students Who Need Additional Instructional Support

Using DIBELS Benchmark Data to Plan Initial

Instructional Groups

(c) Dynamic Measurement Group

What do We Need to Know from Benchmark Data?

• In general, what skills do the children in my class/school/district have?

• Are there children who may need additional support?

• How many children may need additional support?

• Which children may need additional support to achieve outcomes?

• What supports do I need to address the needs of my students?

8

9

Objectives:What You Will Learn and Do

1. Use DIBELS Histogram Reports to identify how many students may be in need of instructional support.

2. Use DIBELS class/grade lists to identify students who may need additional instructional support.

• Identify instructional recommendations.

• Identify instructional priorities

• Gather skills analysis information.

• Plan initial instructional grouping

Using Student Datain an Outcomes-Driven Model:

Decision Making Steps

1. Identify Goals for Expected Performance

2. Identify and Validate Level of Support Needed to meet Expected Performance Goals

3. Plan and Implement Level of Support

4. Evaluate and, if Necessary, Modify Support Plan

5. Review Outcomes

10


What essential Big Idea is assessed?

Big Idea DIBELS Measure

Phonological Awareness

Alphabetic Principle

Fluency and Accuracy

Initial Sounds Fluency (ISF)Phonemic Segmentation

Fluency (PSF)

Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF)

Oral Reading Fluency (ORF)


• For every goal, there are two questions to answer:

1. How much? Determine the critical value for the measure.

2. By when? Determine when the child should attain proficiency of the skill to remain on-track.

• How far away a child is from the critical benchmark indicates the level of instructional intensity needed.

What is the Established Goalfor that Measure?

13


Goal:

All students reading at grade-

level by the end of third grade



Measure How Much? By When?

Initial Sounds Fluency 25 or more Middle of K

Phonemic Segmentation

Fluency35 or more End of K

Nonsense Word Fluency

25 or more50 or more

End of KMiddle of 1st

Oral Reading Fluency

1st: 40 or more2nd: 90 or more3rd: 110 or more

1st: End of year2nd: End of year3rd: End of year


DeficitAt RiskEmergingSome Risk

EstablishedLow Risk

Final Benchmark Goals and Later:

Goal Skills

Progressive or Midpoint Benchmark Goals: Developing Skills

Instructional Status Terminology

Used for all measures except ORF and LNF


Describing Student Performance

• Established: Student has met or exceeded the benchmark value for the measure.

– Implication: Current instructional program is meeting the child's needs

• Emerging: Student is at-risk for not meeting the next critical benchmark.

– Implication: Modify instructional program and monitor more often (1-2 x a month)

• Deficit: Student is at significant risk of not meeting the next critical benchmark without significant changes to the instructional program.

– Implication: Modify instructional program significantly and monitor student performance more often (2-3 x a month)


Kindergarten DIBELS Benchmark Goals

So how are we doing in Fall?


First Grade DIBELS Benchmark Goals

So how are we doing in Fall?


Second & Third Grade DIBELS Benchmark Goals

2nd Grade

3rd GradeSo how are we doing in Fall?

Using Student data in an Outcomes-Driven Model: Decision making steps


2. Identify and Validate Level of Support Needed to meet Expected Performance Goals

3. Plan and Implement Level of Support

4. Evaluate and, if Necessary, Modify Support Plan

5. Review Outcomes

21

2. Identify and Validate Level of Support Needed to Meet Expected Performance Goals

• Use Benchmark Assessment Results to Answer: – How many students are in need of additional

instructional support?– Which children are in need of additional

instructional support?


• A histogram summarizes the distribution of scores of all children in a grade within a school/district. It provides information on both the number and percentage of children

performing at specified values.

3

9

How many students are in need of additional instructional support?

Phoneme Segmentation Fluency


How many students are in need of additional instructional support?

• At this school, how many students received a score between the following scores?

0-4: ______ 25-29: ________ 45-49: _______

• What percent of these beginning-of-the-year first graders have established skills in phonological awareness? ____

Phoneme Segmentation Fluency


• In this school, what percentage of students would you select to receive additional instructional support? ____________

44% Low risk for reading difficulties25% Some risk for reading difficulties31% At risk for reading difficulties

Fall 2nd GradeOral Reading Fluency

How many students are in need of additional



• Using the Analyzing School-Level

Performance: Interpreting Histograms

Activity Sheet, review your school’s histograms

and identify the percent of students at each

status level:

– At risk, Some risk, Low risk (Developing Skills)

– Deficit, Emerging, Established (Goal Skills)

Applying It to Your School: How many students are in need of additional



DIBELS Class Listsand Grade Lists

• Depending on your school’s plan, you may choose to use the Class List Reports (within class grouping) or Grade list Reports (within grade grouping)

(c) Dynamic Measurement Group

Three Levels of Instructional Support•Instructional recommendation categories:

•Benchmark: Established skill performance across all administered measures.•Strategic: One or more skill areas are not within the expected performance range.•Intensive: One or more skill areas are significantly at-risk for later reading difficulty

•Instructional Recommendations Are Based on Performance Across All Measures

•Provide a general description of the instructional intensity needed for the student to achieve the next benchmark goal.


Sample Odds of Achieving Early Literacy Goals for Different Patterns of DIBELS Performance

dibels.uoregon.edu/techreports/decision_rule_summary.pdf

Table 4 Instructional Recommendations for Individual Patterns of Performance on Middle of Kindergarten DIBELS Benchmark Assessment

Percent Meeting Later Goals

Initial Sound Fluency

Letter Naming Fluency

Phoneme Segmentation

Fluency Pctile End K PSF

Mid 1 NWF

End 1 ORF Avg. Incidence Instructional Support Recommendation

Deficit At Risk At Risk 3 18 14 19 17 More Common Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention Deficit At Risk Some Risk 7 34 13 21 23 Unusual Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention Emerging At Risk At Risk 9 28 20 28 25 More Common Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention Emerging At Risk Some Risk 11 41 17 22 27 More Common Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention Deficit Some Risk At Risk 13 24 28 48 33 More Common Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention Deficit At Risk Low Risk 15 60 21 25 35 Unusual Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention Deficit Some Risk Some Risk 16 37 30 40 36 Unusual Strategic - Additional Intervention Established At Risk At Risk 17 45 32 31 36 Extremely Rare Strategic - Additional Intervention Emerging Some Risk At Risk 18 37 30 49 38 Unusual Strategic - Additional Intervention Deficit Low Risk At Risk 20 30 37 58 42 Unusual Strategic - Additional Intervention Established Some Risk At Risk 21 42 38 49 43 Extremely Rare Strategic - Additional Intervention Emerging Some Risk Some Risk 22 47 36 51 45 More Common Strategic - Additional Intervention Established At Risk Some Risk 24 52 38 47 45 Extremely Rare Strategic - Additional Intervention Emerging At Risk Low Risk 26 75 29 36 47 More Common Strategic - Additional Intervention Deficit Low Risk Some Risk 28 43 42 68 51 Unusual Strategic - Additional Intervention Deficit Some Risk Low Risk 29 66 41 55 54 Extremely Rare Strategic - Additional Intervention Emerging Low Risk At Risk 31 42 50 70 54 More Common Strategic - Additional Intervention Established Some Risk Some Risk 33 55 44 64 54 Unusual Strategic - Additional Intervention Established At Risk Low Risk 34 82 34 47 54 Unusual Strategic - Additional Intervention Emerging Low Risk Some Risk 38 53 53 80 62 More Common Strategic - Additional Intervention Emerging Some Risk Low Risk 44 82 47 59 63 More Common Strategic - Additional Intervention Established Low Risk At Risk 47 51 58 89 66 Extremely Rare Benchmark - At grade level Established Low Risk Some Risk 49 58 62 87 69 More Common Benchmark - At grade level Deficit Low Risk Low Risk 52 74 60 75 70 Unusual Benchmark - At grade level Established Some Risk Low Risk 54 88 56 69 71 More Common Benchmark - At grade level Emerging Low Risk Low Risk 64 88 68 83 80 More Common Benchmark - At grade level Established Low Risk Low Risk 86 93 80 93 89 More Common Benchmark - At grade level

Note. Percent meeting goal is the conditional percent of children who meet the end of first grade goal of 40 or more on DIBELS ORF. Based on n of approximately 32000 students, 638 schools, and 255 school districts.


Reviewing Class Lists• Use the instructional recommendations as a

guideline for instruction.

– That is, use them but don’t treat scores on the cusp as definitive and verify any scores that don’t match instructional observations.

• Review the list to see how many logical instructional groupings there are.

• Determine which students have similar skills and can be taught together (use brackets to indicate possible groups).

Adapted from: Simmons & Harn © 2004 30

Steps for Planning Instructional Groups:

1. Sort by Instructional Recommendation: Review class list report to identify general instructional recommendations

2. Identify Instructional Priorities: Identify from class list reports students with similar instructional profiles.

3. Conduct Skills Analysis: For students who need intensive instructional support, review probes to determine current reading skills.

4. Plan Initial Grouping: Use information from the instructional profiles and skills analysis to identify initial grouping plans.

Step 1: Sort by Instructional Recommendation

Review class list report to identify general instructional recommendations.


Students in my class who might need Intensive Instruction:Step 1

DIBELS MeasuresStep 2 Step 3

Student Name Instructional Priorities Skills Analysis Notes

Students in my class who might need Strategic Instruction:Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

DIBELS Measures

Student Name Instructional Priorities Skills Analysis Notes

Planning Instructional Support (Steps 1-3) Activity Sheet


Name


Phoneme SegmentationFluency


Instructional RecommendationScore %ile Status Score %ile Status Score %ile Status

Casey 2 1 At risk 6 4 Deficit 0 1 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Greg 17 12 At risk 30 17 Emerging 6 6 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Cassie 15 9 At risk 17 8 Emerging 8 8 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Sandra 23 23 At risk 29 15 Emerging 15 18 Some Risk Strategic - Additional Intervention

Rachel 28 32 Some risk 30 17 Emerging 19 26 Some Risk Strategic - Additional Intervention

Ben 20 17 At risk 38 31 Established 20 29 Some Risk Strategic - Additional Intervention

Jill 59 92 Low risk 30 17 Emerging 24 39 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Ivan 26 28 Some risk 41 39 Established 24 39 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Katie 27 30 Some risk 31 19 Emerging 28 51 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Erin 23 23 At risk 44 49 Established 28 51 Low Risk Strategic - Additional Intervention

Page 47 75 Low risk 38 31 Established 33 62 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Juanita 33 42 Some risk 30 17 Emerging 49 85 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Jose 51 82 Low risk 52 74 Established 68 94 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Taylor 65 96 Low risk 44 49 Established 98 99 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

First Grade Fall Teacher ReportPut a box around students needing intensive Intervention

Underline students needing strategic intervention




Student Name LNF PSF NWF Instructional Priorities Skills Analysis NotesCasey 2 6 0

Greg 17 30 6

Cassie 15 17 8


DIBELS Measures

Student Name LNF PSF NWF Instructional Priorities Skills Analysis NotesSandra 23 29 15

Rachel 28 30 19

Ben 20 38 20

Eric 23 44 28

1. Using the Class List/Teacher Report, identify which students have an “intensive” instructional recommendation and write their names in the “intensive” instructional recommendation box

2. Fill in DIBELS measures administered

3. Record student raw scores for each measure


Simmons & Harn © 2004

Step 1:Sort by Instructional Recommendation

First Grade Example

DIBELS Measure & ScoresStudent Name LNF PSF NWF

Casey 2 6 0Greg 17 30 6Cassie 15 17 8


Sandra 23 29 15Rachel 28 30 19Ben 20 38 20Erin 23 44 28

Students Who Need Intensive Intervention

Students Who Need Strategic Intervention


Name


Instructional RecommendationScore Percentile Status

Kelsey 12 2 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Tyler 25 9 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Nick 33 11 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Jemane 37 13 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Jessie 38 14 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Tim 40 15 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Jack 47 18 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Les 50 21 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

AJ 54 24 Some Risk Strategic - Additional Intervention

Jon 63 31 Some Risk Strategic - Additional Intervention

Leann 76 46 Some Risk Strategic - Additional Intervention

Dan 81 52 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Vick 83 53 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Tom 88 59 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Donovan 96 66 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Vira 97 67 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Frank 100 70 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Wes 113 79 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Destiny 135 92 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Maria 148 96 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

3rd Grade Fall Teacher Report


Step 1: Sort by Instructional RecommendationThird Grade Example

DIBELS Measure & ScoresStudent Name ORFKelsey 12Tyler 25Nick 33J emane 37J essie 38Tim 40J ack 47Les 50

Students Who May Need Intensive Intervention

DIBELS Measure & ScoresStudent Name ORFAJ 54J on 63Leann 76

Students Who May Need Strategic Intervention

38

Materials:

• Activity Sheet: Planning Instructional Groups (Steps 1-3)

• Class List / Teacher Report

Complete Step 1 on the Activity Sheet:

1. Using the Class List/Teacher Report, identify which students have an “intensive” instructional recommendation and write their names in the “intensive” instructional recommendation box on the Activity Sheet

2. Fill in the DIBELS measures administered

3. Record student raw scores for each measure

4. Repeat for students with a “strategic” instructional recommendation

ActivityStep 1: Sort by Instructional Recommendation


Let’s look at some examples…

How are Instructional Recommendations and Risk Status associated with Odds

of Success?

40

Example: Identifying Odds of Success for Casey

Fall First Grade Intensive Students

1. Identify Casey’s pattern of performance using DIBELS:

2. Locate the Technical Report #11 table for Fall 1st Grade

3. Match Casey’s pattern of performance to one of the listed patterns in the table.

3. Identify the student’s odds of reaching next goals:

What percentage of students with Casey’s performance pattern reach:

Middle of 1st NWF goal? ____

End of 1st ORF goal? ____



At-Risk, Deficit, At-Risk


Example: Identifying Odds of Success

42

At Risk Deficit At Risk 3 6 13 14 More Common Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Example: Identifying Odds of Success

• 6 % of students with this pattern meet the goal for Middle of First Grade NWF

•13 % of students with this pattern meet the goal for End of First Grade DORF


Example: Identifying Odds of Success for Casey

Fall First Grade Intensive Students

1. Identify Casey’s pattern of performance:2. Locate the Technical Report #11 table for Fall 1st Grade 3. Match Casey’s pattern of performance to one of the listed

patterns in the table. 3. Identify the student’s odds of reaching next goals:

What percentage of students with Casey’s performance pattern reach:

Middle of 1st NWF goal? ____

End of 1st ORF goal? ____

613



At-Risk, Deficit, At-Risk

44

School Team Activity: Identifying Odds of Success for Your Student

1. Please work as a school team.

2. Choose one First Grade student from the intensive instructional recommendation list: ____________

3. List this student’s pattern of performance________, _________, ________

3. Locate the Technical Report #11 table for Fall of First Grade

4. Match your student’s pattern of performance to one of the patterns listed in the table.

5. Identify the student’s odds of reaching next goals:What percentage of students with this student’s performance pattern reach:

Middle of 1st NWF goal? ___

End of 1st ORF goal? ___

6. Discuss what this means in terms of instructional priorities and instructional pacing for your school.

Changing this prediction is our responsibility!!!!

Step 2: Identify Instructional Priorities

Identify from class list reports students with similar instructional profiles.


Identifying Instruction Priorities

• The Instructional Recommendation is created by analyzing a student’s performance across all of the measures administered.

• Students with the same Instructional Recommendation may have different Instructional Priorities

46


Identifying Instruction Priorities• Identify students who did not meet the benchmark

(Goal Skill) or who are at-risk for not reaching the benchmark (Developing Skill).

• Use this information to determine instructional priorities.

DeficitAt Risk

EmergingSome Risk

EstablishedLow Risk

Final Benchmark Goals and Later:

Goal Skills

Progressive or Midpoint Benchmark Goals: Developing Skills

47


Name



















What is the essential measure in Fall of 1st?

First Grade Fall Teacher Report

Similar performance, why different Instructional Recommendations?


Name



















First Grade Fall Teacher Report


Using DIBELS to Identify Instructional Priorities:

Using the Planning Instructional Support Activity Sheet:

1. High-light the DIBELS scores that are below benchmark

2. Use pink marker to high-light scores in the “At Risk” or “Deficit” range

3. Use yellow marker to high-light scores in the “some risk” or “Emerging” range

4. Identify instructional priorities based on skills below expected performance


Step 2: Identify Instructional PrioritiesFirst Grade Example




Sandra 23 29 15Rachel 28 30 19Ben 20 38 20Erin 23 44 28


Students Who May Need Strategic Intervention

Validate this score?




Student Name LNF PSF NWF Instructional Priorities Skills Analysis NotesCasy 2 6 0 Phoneme Segmentation/ Alphabetic

PrincipleGreg 17 30 6 Phoneme Segmentation/ AlphabeticPrincipleCassie 15 17 8 Phoneme Segmentation/ AlphabeticPrinciple


DIBELS Measures

Student Name LNF PSF NWF Instructional Priorities Skills Analysis NotesSandra 23 29 15 Phoneme Segmentation/ Alphabetic

PrincipleRachel 28 30 19 Phoneme Segmentation/ AlphabeticPrincipleBen 20 38 20 Alphabetic Principle

Erin 23 44 28 * Validate Score- Benchmark I nstruction?



Name


Instructional RecommendationScore Percentile Status

Kelsey 12 2 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Tyler 25 9 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Nick 33 11 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Jemane 37 13 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Jessie 38 14 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Tim 40 15 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Jack 47 18 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

Les 50 21 At Risk Intensive - Needs Substantial Intervention

AJ 54 24 Some Risk Strategic - Additional Intervention

Jon 63 31 Some Risk Strategic - Additional Intervention

Leann 76 46 Some Risk Strategic - Additional Intervention

Dan 81 52 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Vick 83 53 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Tom 88 59 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Donovan 96 66 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Vira 97 67 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Frank 100 70 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Wes 113 79 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Destiny 135 92 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

Maria 148 96 Low Risk Benchmark - At Grade Level

3rd Grade Fall Teacher Report


Step 2: Identify Instructional PrioritiesThird Grade Example

DIBELS Measure & ScoresStudent Name ORFKelsey 12Tyler 25Nick 33J ermane 37J essie 38Tim 40J ack 47Les 50


DIBELS Measure & ScoresStudent Name ORFAJ 54J on 63Leann 76

Students Who May Need Strategic InterventionVery close to benchmark!

Much lower than other students in the intensive range




Student Name ORF Instructional Priorities Skills Analysis NotesKelsey 12

Tyler 25

Nick 33

Jermane 37

Jessie 38

Tim 40

Jack 47

Les 50


DIBELS Measures

Student Name ORF Instructional Priorities Skills Analysis NotesAJ 54

Jon 63

Leann 76

Decoding?

Fluency?

Need more information from skills analysis!



Activity: Identify Instructional PrioritiesMaterials:

• Planning Instructional Groups (Steps 1-3)

• Class List / Teacher Report

Complete Step 2 Activity Sheet:

1. High-light the DIBELS scores that are below benchmark

2. Use pink marker to high-light scores in the “At Risk” or “Deficit” range

3. Use yellow marker to high-light scores in the “some risk” or “Emerging” range

4. Identify Instructional priorities based on skills below expected performance

56

Step 3: Skills Analysis

Use Probes And/Or Other Assessment Data To Identify Difficulty:

What More Information Do You Need and Have?


Step 3:Skills Analysis

• Review the student testing booklets

• Determine if there is a pattern of reading

performance (i.e., good accuracy but low

fluency, high error rate, etc.)1. What type of errors are being made?

2. What are appropriate instructional objectives?




Student Name LNF PSF NWF Instructional Priorities Skills Analysis NotesCasy 2 6 0 Phoneme Segmentation/ Alphabetic

PrincipleGreg 17 30 6 Phoneme Segmentation/ AlphabeticPrincipleCassie 15 17 8 Phoneme Segmentation/ AlphabeticPrinciple


DIBELS Measures


PrincipleRachel 28 30 19 Phoneme Segmentation/ AlphabeticPrincipleBen 20 38 20 Alphabetic Principle


For example, let’s look at Rachel and Greg’s performance


QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

6

65562

1. Skills Analysis Notes:

First Grade Example Rachel:PSF Performance

30




6

65562


Few errors, repeats ending of words

First Grade Example Rachel:PSF Performance

30


First Grade Example Rachel: NWF Performance

1. Analyze strengths and areas of instructional need? Is the primary need accuracy or fluency of letter sounds?

2. What type of instruction is needed?


First Grade Example Rachel: NWF Performance

1. Analyze strengths and areas of instructional need? Is the primary need accuracy or fluency of letter sounds?


Fluency

Fluency in whole word recognition to aid in reading sentences



DIBELS Measures


PrincipleRachel 28 30 19

Phoneme Segmentation/ AlphabeticPrinciple

Fluency in whole word recognition, phonemesegmentation

Ben 20 38 20 Alphabetic Principle

Erin 23 44 28 * Validate Score- BenchmarkI nstruction?





4

44554


First Grade Example Greg:PSF Performance

30

22




4

44554


Segments initial sound and word ending

First Grade Example Greg:PSF Performance

30

22


First Grade Example: GregNWF Performance

1. Analyze strengths and areas of instructional need? Is the primary need accuracy or fluency of letter sounds.


20

13

7


First Grade Example: GregNWF Performance

1. Analyze strengths and areas of instructional need? Is the primary need accuracy or fluency of letter sounds.


20

13

7

Accuracy and then fluency

Letter sound instruction, blending, and fluency in blending




Student Name LNF PSF NWF Instructional Priorities Skills Analysis NotesCasy 2 6 0 Phoneme Segmentation/ Alphabetic Principle

Greg 17 30 6 Phoneme Segmentation/ Alphabetic PrincipleWork on accuracy, letter soundinstruction, fluency in phonemicsegmentationCassie 15 17 8 Phoneme Segmentation/ Alphabetic Principle


Adapted from Simmons & Harn © 2004 70

Third Grade Example:KelseyInstructional Implications

1. Is fluency an appropriate objective?

2. What types of errors are being made?


mess

camp

12


Third Grade Example:KelseyInstructional Implications

1. Is fluency an appropriate objective?

2. What types of errors are being made?


12 / 24 = 50% accuracy

mess

camp

Sight words and decoding errors

Continued phonics instruction, sight words, and attention to accuracy and fluency to improve comprehension

12




Student Name ORF Instructional Priorities Skills Analysis NotesKelsey 12 Alphabetic PrincipleTyler 25

Nick 33

J ermane 37

J essie 38

Tim 40

J ack 47

Les 50


DIBELS Measures

Student Name ORF Instructional Priorities Skills Analysis NotesAJ 54

J on 63

Leann 76



home brought

sc

sc

sc

47

Third Grade Example: JackInstructional Implications

Is fluency an appropriate objective?

What types of errors are being made?

What type of instruction is needed?


home brought

sc

sc

sc

47

Third Grade Example: JackInstructional Implications

Is fluency an appropriate objective?

What types of errors are being made?

What type of instruction is needed?

47 / 49 = 96% accuracy

Decoding errors that preserve meaning, many self-corrections

Continued phonics instruction but with a focus on fluency instruction




Student Name ORF Instructional Priorities Skills Analysis NotesKelsey 12 Alphabetic PrincipleTyler 25

Nick 33

J ermane 37

J essie 38

Tim 40

J ack 47 Fluency/ Alphabetic Principle Errors preserve meaning, many self -correctsLes 50

75



Activity: Skills Analysis

Materials:

• DIBELS Student Test Booklets

Complete Step 3:

1. Review student test booklets to identify error patterns for intensive students

2. Make instructionally relevant notes when possible

76

Step 4: Initial Grouping

Use information from the instructional profiles and skills analysis to further refine groups

77

78

Planning Initial Grouping

• Identify Students with similar instructional recommendations and instructional priorities

• These plans are for initial grouping--use progress monitoring and program assessment to revise grouping plans in a timely manner


Step 4: Initial Grouping

1. Use the Planning Instructional Support (Steps 1-3) Activity Sheet to identify: – Students with similar instructional recommendations

– Students with similar instructional priorities

2. Transfer the students to the Planning Instructional Groups (Step 4) Activity Sheet– Include information about their instructional

recommendation, instructional priorities, and skills analysis notes.




Student Name LNF PSF NWF Instructional Priorities Skills Analysis NotesCasy 2 6 0 Phoneme Segmentation/ Alphabetic Principle

Greg 17 30 6 Phoneme Segmentation/ Alphabetic PrincipleWork on accuracy, letter soundinstruction, fluency in phonemicsegmentationCassie 15 17 8 Phoneme Segmentation/ Alphabetic Principle


DIBELS Measures


PrincipleRachel 28 30 19 Phoneme Segmentation/ AlphabeticPrinciple

Fluency in whole word recognition

Ben 20 38 20 Alphabetic Principle


80


Initial Grouping Summary

Group: AGrade(s): _____ _First Grade____ _____ ___Instructional Recommendation(s): I ntensive

Primary Instructional Focus: Phoneme Segmentation/ Alphabetic PrincipleFrequency of Progress Monitoring:____Every 2 weeks_____ ____ ____

Student NameInstructional

RecommendationInstructional

PrioritiesSkills Analysis

NotesCasey Intensive Phonemic Segmentation/

Alphabetic Principle

Greg Intensive Phonemic Segmentation/Alphabetic Principle

Cassie Intensive Phonemic Segmentation/Alphabetic Principle

81


Activity: Initial Grouping

Materials:

• Planning Instructional Groups (Step 4)

Complete Step 4

1. Use Planning Instructional Groups (Steps 1-3) to identify students with similar instructional priorities

82

83

Next Steps:

• Groups and Instructional Priorities will change depending on student’s response to instruction and further assessment

• What further information do you need to collect?

– Re-testing for students “on the cusp” or surprising scores (Validating the information is accurate.)

– Specific Placement Information

– Diagnostic Information

– Progress Monitoring

Identifying Students Who Need Additional Instructional Support and Planning Support IBR II Cohort B September 28 and 29, 2005.

Documents

need of instructional

support plan

level of support

model slide

oregon reading

planning support ibr

simmons harn

instructional implications