West Ada School District Fluency Guidelines Grades 1-5 Reporting Topic 3

Similar documents
DIBELSnet System- Wide Percentile Ranks for. DIBELS Next. Elizabeth N Dewey, M.Sc. Ruth A. Kaminski, Ph.D. Roland H. Good, III, Ph.D.

Arizona Common Core Standards English Language Arts Grade 3

Wednesday 11/07/2018. School Day 57. 8:15am - 8:45am English Lesson Mixed Review pg. 110 Bell Ringer Part A Possessive Nouns Homework pg 110 Part A

2013 Revised Alabama Course of Study English Language Arts Grade 3

A Correlation of. Scott Foresman. Reading Street. Common Core. to the. Arkansas English Language Arts Standards Grade 3

Kansas College and Career Ready Standards for English Language Arts Grade 4

Reading Standards for the Archdiocese of Detroit Grade 1

Scott Foresman Reading Street Common Core 2013

August September 2012

Orientation and Conferencing Plan Stage 1

Arizona Common Core Standards English Language Arts Grade 5

Reading Standards for the Archdiocese of Detroit Grade 5

DIBELSnet Preliminary System-Wide Percentile Ranks for DIBELS Math Early Release

Indiana Academic Standards English/Language Arts (2014) Grade 3

2nd Grade Reading, Language, and Writing Pacing Guide. August 2012

2018 Linking Study: Predicting Performance on the TNReady Assessments based on MAP Growth Scores

2018 Linking Study: Predicting Performance on the Performance Evaluation for Alaska s Schools (PEAKS) based on MAP Growth Scores

RESEARCH ON ASSESSMENTS

School Progress. Elementary, Middle, and High Schools, K 12 Campuses, AEAs, and Districts

2018 Linking Study: Predicting Performance on the NSCAS Summative ELA and Mathematics Assessments based on MAP Growth Scores

Gains in Written Communication Among Learning Habits Students: A Report on an Initial Assessment Exercise

How to Store a Billion Beans [Language Arts]

Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Splash into Pre-K correlated to the. Common Core Standards for English Language Arts Grade K

Spelling Scoring Guide

Technical Manual for Gibson Test of Cognitive Skills- Revised

Linking the Indiana ISTEP+ Assessments to the NWEA MAP Growth Tests. February 2017 Updated November 2017

Scholastic s Early Childhood Program correlated to the Kentucky Primary English/Language Arts Standards

Task Group(s): A1: Read continuous text A2: Interpret documents C3: Use measures

Scott Foresman Reading Street Common Core Grade 6, 2013

Dunlap Community Unit School District #323 Balanced Scorecard. Updated 12/13/16

NOTE All entries must be checked in upon arrival at MESA Day.

School Driver Trainer Inservice

Problem Solving Recording Sheet

Linking the Virginia SOL Assessments to NWEA MAP Growth Tests *

Objective: Estimate and measure liquid volume in liters and milliliters using the vertical number line.

Linking the North Carolina EOG Assessments to NWEA MAP Growth Tests *

Vocational Qualifications (QCF, NVQ, NQF) CPC (Certificate of Professional Competence)

Linking the Mississippi Assessment Program to NWEA MAP Tests

Course Syllabus

Linking the Alaska AMP Assessments to NWEA MAP Tests

Objective: Estimate and measure liquid volume in liters and milliliters using the vertical number line.

Linking the Indiana ISTEP+ Assessments to NWEA MAP Tests

Linking the New York State NYSTP Assessments to NWEA MAP Growth Tests *

Linking a Statewide Assessment to the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) for 4 th and 8 th Grade Mathematics

ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION MATHEMATICS ADOPTION. Common Core State Standards Correlation. and

Common pitfalls in (academic) writing Anya Siddiqi Writing Clinic Language Centre

We trust that these data are helpful to you. If you have any questions, feel free to contact Dr. Joe Ludlum at or

2016 Annual Statistical Report on the HiSET Exam

Linking the Georgia Milestones Assessments to NWEA MAP Growth Tests *

2017 Annual Statistical Report on the HiSET Exam

Norming Tables for the Student Testing Program (STP97)

MODULE 6 Lower Anchors & Tethers for CHildren

Linking the Kansas KAP Assessments to NWEA MAP Growth Tests *


2013 PLS Alumni/ae Survey: Overall Evaluation of the Program

Enrollment and Educator Data ( School Year) About the Data

Linking the Florida Standards Assessments (FSA) to NWEA MAP

Police Operations: Tachograph Equipment Inspection

Correlation to the Common Core State Standards

Simulating Trucks in CORSIM

A REPORT ON THE STATISTICAL CHARACTERISTICS of the Highlands Ability Battery CD

Linking the PARCC Assessments to NWEA MAP Growth Tests

DESIGN AND PRESENTATION

Edition ENGLISH / SPANISH. correlated to the

PVP Field Calibration and Accuracy of Torque Wrenches. Proceedings of ASME PVP ASME Pressure Vessel and Piping Conference PVP2011-

Developing PMs for Hydraulic System

Write It! Station Directions

AUTO 140A: VEHICLE MAINTENANCE

Busy Ant Maths and the Scottish Curriculum for Excellence Foundation Level - Primary 1

PT1 9wk Test Study Guide

Enrollment and Educator Data ( School Year) About the Data

Who has trouble reporting prior day events?

Barrie D. Fitzgerald Senior Research Analyst, Valdosta State University Sarah E. Hough Research Analyst, Valdosta State University Tiffany S.

Train Examination (Braking System) Addendum. Lesson Plan and WorkBook

Beyond Autonomous Cars; Open Autonomous Vehicle Safety Competitions. Mike Cannon Boyd Wilson Clemson University & Omnibond

Higher National Unit Specification. General information for centres. Electrical Motors and Motor Starting. Unit code: DV9M 34

MAGNETIC LEVITATION VEHICLES

-SQA-SCOTTISH QUALIFICATIONS AUTHORITY. Hanover House 24 Douglas Street GLASGOW G2 7NG NATIONAL CERTIFICATE MODULE DESCRIPTOR

CFM-20/40/100/200/300

Off-Road Skills Demonstration

ENERGY & UTILITIES. Electricity Metering & Sub-Metering Concepts and Applications. BuildingsOne April 30, 2018

DRIVER EDUCATION FOR ADULTS WITH AN INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY IN A PRISON SETTING: REDUCING RECIDIVISM

erider vs. BRT in Priority Areas

Oregon DOT Slow-Speed Weigh-in-Motion (SWIM) Project: Analysis of Initial Weight Data

-SQA- SCOTTISH QUALIFICATIONS AUTHORITY NATIONAL CERTIFICATE MODULE: UNIT SPECIFICATION GENERAL INFORMATION. -Module Number Session

Honda Accord theft losses an update

NEW MEMBERSHIP BENEFITS AND SUBSCRIPTION

RISK ASSESSMENT FOR SCHOOL TRIPS (Minibus)

Generation Resource Cold Weather Operational Exercise

Scholastic s Early Childhood Program Correlated to the Minnesota Pre-K Standards

Enhanced Road Assessment (ERA) Description

OKLAHOMA CORPORATION COMMISSION REGULATED ELECTRIC UTILITIES 2017 RELIABILITY SCORECARD

WorkKeys District Data

Driving A Manual Car For Beginners

Soybean Math: Fun by the Bushel! [Math]

DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY AND STRATEGIC PLAN

CPCS renewal test factsheet

RSMS. RSMS is. Road Surface Management System. Road Surface Management Goals - CNHRPC. Road Surface Management Goals - Municipal

ROBOT C CHALLENGE DESIGN DOCUMENT TEAM NAME. Sample Design Document. Bolt EVA. Lightning. RoboGirls. Cloud9. Femmebots

NIH Toolbox Emotion Raw Score to T-Score Conversion Tables September 8, 2017

Transcription:

West Ada School District Fluency Guidelines Grades 1-5 Reporting Topic 3 Reading researcher Tim Rasinski (2013) identifies the components of fluency as accuracy, rate, and expression in service to solid comprehension. Keep in mind that the IRI assesses only reading speed and accuracy without regard to expression and comprehension. Instructions: 1. Choose a grade-level passage* of up to 200 words. This passage should be unfamiliar to students. Journeys includes a book called Cold Reads that is intended for this purpose. R-CBMs from AIMSweb and DIBELS are also appropriate. 2. Time the student reading for 1 minute and mark the errors to help calculate words read correctly. Accuracy Calculation: Total number of words read correctly divided by total words read (correct and/or corrected + uncorrected errors). Example: 137 words read correctly / 145 total words read (137 correct + 8 uncorrected errors) = 94.5% correct. Please note that a self-corrected miscue/error does not count as an error. Mispronouncing proper nouns is counted as an error. Skipping a line is counted as multiple errors (the total number of words skipped). 3. In order to be marked a 3 on the Standards-based Report Card for RT 3, students need to be reading at or above benchmarks indicated on the following norms chart with at least 95% accuracy as well as exhibiting the oral reading traits described on the rubric on the next page. Please note that the norms used for reporting fluency may differ slightly from current AIMSweb norms and/or IRI cut scores. IRI cut scores are included in this document so teachers can be aware of these differences. Please teach students word attack skills rather than instructing them to skip words on timed readings. Having students skip words when reading rather than decoding them is counter-productive to what skilled readers do. *Grade level passages may be informational, narrative or poetry. Appropriate sources for passages include, but are not limited to HMH Journeys myon Reader AIMSweb DIBELS easycbm SKIP Updated September 2016

West Ada School District Oral Reading Fluency Rubric (adapted from the NAEP Oral Reading Fluency Scale) Students must have a check in all three categories to earn the score. If scores are split between two proficiency levels, the reported proficiency level is the lower level. For example, if the score is split between a 4 and a 3, then the proficiency level is a 3. 4 Reads above-grade level informational and narrative text in meaningful phrase groups with expression preserving the author s syntax Rate exceeds grade-level benchmarks Accuracy at/above 95% 3 Reads grade level text primarily in larger, meaningful phrase groups Rate meets grade level benchmarks Accuracy at/above 95% 2.5 Reads grade level text primarily in three- and four-word phrase groups, but with little expressive interpretation Rate is near the benchmark rate Accuracy is at least 90% 2 Reads primarily in two-word phrase groups with some threeand four-word groupings with little expression or reads too quickly with no expression Rate is either below the benchmark or student fails to attempt word attack skills and skips words without attempting to decode Accuracy is at least 90% 1 Reads primarily word-by-word lacking expressive interpretation Rate is significantly below grade level benchmarks Accuracy is at or below 89% Syntax: the order of words in a sentence, clause, or phrase Updated September 2016

Accuracy Rate (Source: Reading A-Z, Running Records and Benchmark Books https://www.readinga-z.com/guided/ runrecord.html#accuracy) Accuracy rate is expressed as a percentage. You can calculate the accuracy rate using the following formula: (Total words read Total errors) / Total words read x 100 = Accuracy rate Please note that self-corrections are not counted as errors? Example: (99 total words read 8 errors ) / 99 total words read x 100 = Accuracy rate 91/99 x 100 =.919 which equals 91.9%, or 92% rounded to the nearest whole number. This student s accuracy rate is not meeting the 95% accuracy benchmark. You can use accuracy rate to determine whether the text read is easy enough for independent reading, appropriate to use without frustration during reading, or too difficult for the reader. The breakdown of these three categories is as follows: Easy enough for independent reading = 95 100% Instructional level for use in leveled reading session = 90 94% Too difficult and will frustrate the reader = 89% and below Updated September 2016

90 81 111 1.9 85 68 101 80 55 90 75 47 82 2.2 70 39 76 65 34 70 60 29 64 55 26 59 1 50 23 53 1.9 IRI Benchmarks=District Benchmarks 45 20 48 Fall =11 wcpm baseline not reported to state 40 18 43 Winter = 23 wcpm Spring only = 53 wcpm 35 16 38 30 14 33 25 12 28 1.0 20 10 24 15 8 19 10 6 15 0.6 90 106 125 142 1.1 85 96 116 133 80 86 107 124 75 79 100 117 1.2 70 72 94 111 65 68 89 106 60 62 84 100 55 56 78 95 2 53 54 76 92 IRI Benchmarks=District Benchmarks 50 51 72 89 1.2 Fall = 54 wcpm 45 46 67 84 Winter = 77 wcpm 40 41 61 79 Spring = 92 wcpm 35 36 55 74 30 30 49 68 25 25 42 61 1.1 20 20 33 54 15 16 26 43 10 11 18 31 0.6

90 128 146 162 1.1 85 118 137 153 80 107 127 143 75 99 120 137 1.2 70 92 113 130 65 87 108 124 60 82 102 118 56 79 99 110 IRI Benchmarks=District Benchmarks: 3 4 Fall = 77 WCPM Winter = 96 WCPM Spring = 110 WCPM 55 77 97 109 50 71 92 107 1.1 45 66 87 102 40 61 82 96 35 56 76 91 30 50 69 85 25 44 62 78 1.1 20 37 54 70 15 34 45 55 10 31 36 48 0.8 90 145 166 180 1.1 85 136 156 170 80 126 146 160 75 119 139 152 1.0 70 113 133 146 65 105 128 140 60 103 122 134 55 99 117 129 50 94 112 123 0.9 benchmark 45 89 108 118 40 84 103 113 35 79 98 108 30 74 93 103 25 68 87 98 0.9 20 62 80 91 15 54 71 82 10 45 61 72 0.8

90 166 182 194 0.9 85 157 173 185 80 147 163 175 75 139 156 168 0.9 70 132 150 161 65 127 144 156 60 121 137 150 55 116 132 144.5 5 6 50 110 127 139 0.9 benchmark 45 105 122 133 40 101 116 127 35 96 11 121 30 91 105 115 25 85 99 109 0.8 20 79 92 101 15 70 83 92 10 61 74 83 0.7 90 177 195 204 0.7 85 169 185 195 80 160 175 185 75 153 167 177 0.7 70 148 162 171 65 143 156 166 60 137 150 161 55 132 145 156 50 127 140 150 0.7 benchmark 45 121 135 145 40 115 130 140 35 110 124 135 30 104 118 129 25 98 111 122 0.8 20 91 104 114 15 80 93 104 10 68 82 93 0.8

90 180 192 202 0.7 85 171 183 193 80 162 173 184 75 156 165 177 0.7 70 150 158 171 65 144 153 166 60 138 147 160 55 133 142 155 7 8 50 128 136 150 0.7 benchmark 45 123 132 145 40 118 127 140 35 113 122 135 30 107 116 129 25 101 109 123 0.7 20 95 103 116 15 87 96 104 10 79 88 98 0.6 90 185 199 198 0.4 85 177 190 191 80 168 180 183 75 161 173 177 0.5 70 155 166 171 65 150 161 166 60 145 155 161 55 139 151 156 50 133 146 151 0.6 benchmark 45 129 141 147 40 124 135 142 35 118 129 136 30 112 123 130 25 106 115 124 0.6 20 98 107 116 15 88 96 107 10 77 84 97 0.6