You are on page 1of 4

CBA Project Jill Sooy Diagnosis and Remediation of Reading Problems Kent State University

The following analysis will discuss my experience in conducting a CBA analysis with two second grade girls. It will cover some of the things I learned during the process and give an account of each assessment. One of the things I learned was that conducting a CBA analysis takes some practice in order to do it well. This was the first time I had an opportunity to conduct an analysis such as this, and while I did not have an major difficulties, I found that it was more difficult than I thought it would be to keep up with the pace of the readers while trying to appropriately mark reading errors as they happened. I attempted to use the marking system provided in the Informal Reading Inventory module. Since this marking system is not yet automatic to me, I found myself struggling to keep up with the readers. Fortunately, the girls in this analysis were strong readers, so there were not an abundance of errors. Dr. Rasinski mentioned in the podcast for this module that a device to record the reading by students would be a helpful aid, and I can see why this would be the case. Had I access to a recording device at the time of the assessment, I would have recorded each reader and reviewed the recording a time or two to check the accuracy of my initial marking of the passages. Even without a recording device however, I think that each experience in conduction an assessment will make the next experience simpler, make the marking of errors more automatic, and give me a better idea of what to expect. I chose to use 3 Minute Reading Assessments (Rasinski & Padak) for my reading passages because I feel this will be a valuable assessment tool in the future as I work with students. I wanted to use this assignment to gain a bit of experience with it. I used Form A at each of the three levels with one student,

and Form B with the other so that that the student who was assessed second would not hear everything from the first students assessment. I used the word lists from the Burns and Row Informal Reading Inventory. As for some observations on how the assessment went for the two students, I will briefly recount some of the things I observed. For this analysis, I will refer to them as student #1 and student #2. Student #1 seemed to be very aware of the timing device (an egg timer) that was being used. Even though I reminded her to read in the way she normally does and that she is not expected to finish the whole passage, she seemed to try really hard to finish the first two passages, each before the timer sounded. She was able to do so on the first grade passage with 4 errors. On the second and third grade passages, she did not finish, and I felt that the mistakes she made were errors that may not have occurred if she has slowed down a little bit. She read with very good expression, volume, and intonation, but her pace seemed rushed. In fact, she asked, Did I do good? after completing the passages. She repeated a group of words 1-2 times in each passage, but these were not counted as errors because she read the words correctly. When she read the word lists, where no timer was used, she went at a steady pace, and did not miss a word until she got to the third grade list. Student #2 did not seem concerned with the timer, but it took going through the first passage, below grade level, for her to seem comfortable with the process. By the second passage, which was at grade level, she read 30 more words in the one-minute period with one less error. It seemed like after the second passage, her body language was saying, ok, Ive got the hang of this now. On the third passage, she again did very well, reading 120 words

with only three errors and 1 inserted word. Her expression, volume, and intonation were what I considered very good for a second grader. When we went through the word lists, she completed the below grade level, at grade level, and one level above her grade without any errors. She initially misread one word on the 3rd grade list, but she self-corrected without any prompting, so I did not count this as an error. I found the passages a more useful predictor of reading proficiency. The word lists give an idea as to how well students can identify the words, but the passages give a better idea of more than just recognizing words. Factors such as how fast the students is reading, whether they read in a monotone or expressive voice, whether they use punctuation appropriately, and more can only be discovered if students read a whole passage. I think these tools can be used throughout a school year to monitor students progress because they are practical to use. Once a teacher becomes skilled at administering the assessment, he or she can do so within a short period of time, making it possible to conduct assessments several times over the course of the nine month school year to track progress and determine areas of difficulty. With a longer, more in-depth assessment, it would not be practical to do so several times a year because it takes away too much instruction time from students. I am glad I got the opportunity to practice using these tool in this project and feel confident that the experience I gained here will only help me in the future.