Running Head: STUDENT ASSESSMENT & LESSON PLAN PROJECT 1

Student Assessment & Lesson Plan Project

Hannah Silva

EDU 325
STUDENT ASSESSMENT & LESSON PLAN PROJECT 2

Introduction

The student that was assessed in this project was a fifth grade boy named Jimmy. Jimmy

was assessed on October 11th, 2018. Jimmy is from a rural area in Ohio where farmland is the

closest thing for miles. Jimmy lives with his mom and stepdad in a single family home not far

from the school. Jimmy’s grades in school are a bit below average and he struggles in reading

and spelling but has good social interactions with his peers. Jimmy’s Present Level of

Performance (PLOP) for reading is 2.6, his PLOP for spelling is 2, and his PLOP for writing is

also 2. There are not currently any accommodations or adaptations for Jimmy’s assessments

within the school day. Some of his strengths are his creative mind and hands on learning. He

does not currently have a Behavioral Intervention Plan (BIP) and is fairly well behaved for his

age. Jimmy is a sweet student who is eager to please and do well in his studies.

Procedures

The first step of this process was first obtaining a student to assess. This should have may

have been a more difficult process in attaining a student, however, my cooperating teacher at my

current field placement approached me with a student that could be assessed in Dynamic

Indicators of Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS). She had heard through the grapevine that my peers

were being sent to her school to complete the project and asked if I was required to do the same.

I readily agreed and asked who she had in mind. She immediately gave me the name of the

student to assess and said that she would organize all of the arrangements, and had already

printed out the background information sheets to fill out. I was scheduled to conduct the DIBELS

assessment during a portion of my field time the next Tuesday.

Once Tuesday arrived, I organized all of my materials, which consisted of my assessment

booklet, the Daze Probe booklet, and the instructional binders. I arrived at the school and was
STUDENT ASSESSMENT & LESSON PLAN PROJECT 3

met by my cooperating teacher who directed me to a room adjacent to her classroom. She told

me I could set up there and that she would bring the student in a few minutes. One of my peers

that attends the school at the same time slot was also in the same room with her student. After

laying everything out on the table, my student arrived. He was very eager to “help me out” and

was a very compliant student. I pulled out my timer on my phone and began the first session of

DIBELS, which was Oral Reading Fluency (ORF). I gave the instructions as they were outlined

in my book and the testing began. After each probe, I moved onto the Retell Quality portion of

the assessment. After the Retell, we would move onto the next probe. After the first three stories

were completed in the ORF section, we took a small break while I organized the next section of

the test. This final section for fifth grade was the Daze probe. Using peppermint candy as

reinforcement for completing DIBELS, we moved onto the last step. I administered the

questions, gave my student a pencil, set the timer, and he began. After the timer sounded, I gave

him a high five and congratulated him. We then packed up all of our supplies and I walked him

down the hallway to the classroom where he received a peppermint and continued his day. I also

returned to my tasks and the testing session concluded.

Assessments Given

DIBELS are the curriculum based assessments that are administered to test students’

reading comprehension. DIBELS assessments are reliable predictors of reading

underachievement that are used to identify students that may be in need of intervention and to

view student progress (Scheffel, Lefly, & Houser, 2012). The fifth grade DIBELS assessment

that is administered consists of three tests. These three tests are Oral Reading Fluency, Retell,

and Daze. The ORF assessment assesses the number of correct words that the child can read per

minute in grade level connected text (Scheffel et al., 2012). The student is instructed to begin
STUDENT ASSESSMENT & LESSON PLAN PROJECT 4

reading and then is monitored on how far they are able to read aloud and what mistakes are made

during the reading. The ORF assesses the student’s ability to decipher words aloud while blindly

reading a passage.

The second portion of the DIBELS DORF is Retell Fluency (RTF). Authors explain that

RTF is a test that involves a one minute retelling of what the student read in the ORF passage,

with the raw score consisting of the median number of relative words the student used (Munger,

LoFaro., Kawryga, Sovocool, & Medina, 2014). Within this section, the student is expected to be

able to retell the story that they just read from memory. There was a one minute timer and the

student was scored on how many words, pertaining to the story, were recounted within that time

limit. The Retell assessed the students’ ability to connect what they previously read to prior

knowledge.

The third and final portion is the Daze Probe. According to Morris and Trathen (2017),

The Daze probe is comprehension with a modified cloze task. This section of the test is a more

independent assessment, where the student is expected to read a passage and pick a word from a

word bank that best suits the sentence. This is accomplished silently with a three minute timer.

The student is assessed on how many words they correctly circle to suit the sentence that is

outlined in the passage. This assesses how much vocabulary the student knows and can decode to

fit within a sentence.

Results and Analysis

Overall, Jimmy scored well below benchmark for almost all of his probes. The first

assessment for Jimmy, DORF Words Correct, is well below benchmark. Jimmy’s exact score on

the test is a median score of forty-nine. However, the above benchmark score is a one hundred

twenty-one. His DORF accuracy for this measures at a ninety-two percent, which is well below
STUDENT ASSESSMENT & LESSON PLAN PROJECT 5

the benchmark of ninety-eight percent. This first portion of the assessment presented Jimmy with

some difficulties that affected his perception of the assessment. The assessment presented Jimmy

with difficulties during sentence transition from one line to another. Throughout this portion

Jimmy would lose his place while reading and have to trace words back to the beginning

sentence in order to maintain the flow of the paragraph. However, aside from this, Jimmy’s test

shows that he reads at a slower pace than the benchmark.

The second portion of the DIBELS DORF test, RTF, shows that Jimmy also needs

assistance but not nearly as much as the DORF portion. Jimmy’s score is a twenty-eight, which

is on the higher end of the scale. This score is marked at below benchmark, but close to the

benchmark. The benchmark is a thirty-three for this test, which is close to what Jimmy’s score is.

Jimmy can be distracted sometimes and has a habit of saying “um”, so the RTF score could have

been higher but he still performed well. However, Jimmy’s quality of response score is at

benchmark and is right where he should be for this time of the year.

The third probe, Daze, is also a bit lacking in score. Jimmy’s score for the Daze is a three

which is considered well below benchmark. The benchmark goal is an eighteen, so Jimmy does

need some help in this area. Jimmy’s Daze probe shows that he struggles with words longer than

three syllables. All of the words with a maximum of three syllables are simpler for Jimmy to

decode but this probe consists of a key four syllabic word that appears several times throughout

the first few sentences. If Jimmy had some skill with decoding larger words, his Daze score may

raise several numbers.

Test Score Benchmark Notes

Oral Reading Fluency Correct: 49 Well Below Errors due to poor

benchmark. sentence transition.
Errors: 4
STUDENT ASSESSMENT & LESSON PLAN PROJECT 6

Retell Fluency Median: 28 Below Benchmark Is prolonged by

frequent usage of the
word “um”.
Retell Quality Median: 2 At or Above
Benchmark
Daze 3 Well Below Could not decipher
Benchmark four syllable key
words.
Table 1.1

Areas Targeted for Improvement: Targeted Area A

One main targeted literacy area that needs improvement is comprehension. Reading

comprehension is a crucial area for any reader to achieve and can be especially beneficial to

readers like Jimmy. A strategy that could help Jimmy is the use of Movie Maker Journaling. In a

study conducted by Awada and Plana (2018), sixteen teachers were asked about different

strategies to assist with reading comprehension. All sixteen of the teachers responded that Movie

Maker Journals were found to be most effective because students discovered that working with

computers is something they all find common in their life, and they preferred reading and writing

using screens and technology (Awada and Plana, 2018). Jimmy could benefit greatly from

practice using this type of journaling. He enjoys video games and interactions with screens, so

having practice journaling during a film can help Jimmy when he looks back on what he’s

written. He can also go back and weed out needless facts that are not relevant to the main plot.

Author McGough (2013) puts an emphasis on the effect that journaling can have on

reading comprehension. The author states that “journaling actively involves the child in dialogue

about content” (McGough, 2013, p.65). Using this journaling as a strategy combined with

movies can help Jimmy with his comprehension skills. Jimmy could be monitored by turning in a

weekly journal to his teacher about a film or show that he watched and jotted down notes that

pertain to the main message.

STUDENT ASSESSMENT & LESSON PLAN PROJECT 7

Areas Targeted for Improvement: Targeted Area B

Another targeted area for improvement for Jimmy is fluency. This specific area is

targeted because it affects Jimmy’s reading greatly. This was clearly evident in the ORF and

RTF probes. This specific area is targeted because Jimmy’s assessment results showed great

need in this area due to the amount of words correct per minute that he is able to attain. Jimmy’s

total word count for oral reading and retell fluency are extremely low and in need of some

attention. A strategy that I highly recommend is the Word/Phrase Practice Interventions. Kim,

Bryant, & Park, (2017) emphasize that certain procedures such as phrase drill with error

collection and word supply lessons greatly aid students who struggle with fluency. Phrase drill is

the simple practice of repeating phrases or words to help with sight words, while going back and

repeating the erroneous words. Word supply lessons are lessons that are centered around words

and are similar to word walls. The only difference between word walls and word supply lessons

is that the latter is often drawn out into more depth and material that includes words. Jackson and

Narvaez (2013) reinforce this word strategy by stating that visual representations help students in

acquiring an understanding and fluency of key words within vocabulary.

Student progress should be monitored through frequent check ins and DORF. Jimmy

should be administered the assessment on a regular basis and have his progress marked and kept

track of throughout the process.

Conclusion

Jimmy is a bright boy and an overall pleasure to work with and assess. Overall, Jimmy

seems to have struggled in areas of comprehension and fluency throughout his DIBELS

assessment but with the right type of reinforcement, he will be an effective reader sooner than
STUDENT ASSESSMENT & LESSON PLAN PROJECT 8

later. Implementation of the journaling and word wall strategies could help Jimmy in performing

closer to benchmark on his DIBELS and help him read more effectively in the future.

Two aspects to this paper that I found to be important moving forward in regard to CBM

is the research that had to be conducted from the results and the experience that it offered.

Having to research and find supportive articles and references for all of my strategies for Jimmy

was arduous, but effective in that it gave accurate information and scientific findings behind

practices. This will help in moving forward because it gives me practice in making sure that

practices put into effective are actually research based and supported by science. It gives material

that can be reinforced so that there are not ineffective practices used within the classroom.

The experience of administering DIBELS to Jimmy is the most valuable portion of this

paper and exercise. I never learn better than actually doing what I have been learning about.

Simply reading about something is informative but if it came to a real – life scenario of

administering DIBELS, I would have probably been lost. Knowing how to use CBM is a

necessity as a pre-service teacher about to venture out into real classrooms.

STUDENT ASSESSMENT & LESSON PLAN PROJECT 9

Bibliography

Awada, G. & Plana, M.G.C. (2018). Multiple strategies approach and efl reading comprehension

of learners with dyslexia: Teachers’ perceptions. International Journal of Instruction, 11,

463-476.

Jackson, J. & Narvaez, R. (2013). Interactive word walls: Create a tool to increase science

vocabulary in five easy steps. Science and Children, 42-49.

Kim, M.K., Bryant, D.P., Bryant, B.R., & Park, Y. (2017). A synthesis of interventions for

improving oral reading fluency of elementary students with learning disabilities.

Preventing School Failure, 61, 116-125.

McGough, J. (2013). Journaling: A bridge between school and home. Science & Children, 62-67.

Morris, D. & Trathen, W. (2017). Three dibels tasks vs. three informal reading/spelling tasks: A

comparison of predictive validity. Reading Psychology, 38, 289-320.

Munger, K.A., LoFaro, S.A., Kawryga, E.A., Sovocool, E.A., & Medina, S.Y. (2014). Does the

dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills next assessment take a “simple view” of

reading? Educational Assessment, 19, 204-228.

Scheffel, D., Lefly, D., & Houser, J. (2012). The predictive utility of DIBELS reading

assessment for reading comprehension among third grade English language learners and

English speaking children. Reading Improvement, 11, 75-92.