Reading Profile Report

Reader: Marissa (pseudonym) Assessments administered and interpreted by:

Grade: 4th Corrie Dobis

Date of Assessments: October 2nd, 2019 Date of Report: October 14th, 2019

Background Information:
Marissa is a 4th grade student at Barnard Elementary School (pseudonym). Marissa enjoys
reading, especially books that have anything to do with puppies, cheerleading, and gymnastics.
She finds reading challenging at times because sounding out words can be difficult. She
expressed to me that when she approaches a difficult word she skips it and comes back to it when
she finishes the sentence. She likes to read chapter books such as the Magic Tree House book
series because she knows who the main characters are going to be in each book. Currently her
class is participating in a program called “Book Buddies” and she is excited about getting a new
book to read to her Kindergarten partner. She expresses her interest in reading by telling me that
at home she likes to read chapter books and if she doesn’t have specific homework she picks up a
book and reads!

Assessments

1. Elementary Spelling Inventory

Authors Bear, Invernizzi, Templeton, & Johnston (2016) designed the Elementary
Spelling Inventory as an assessment that could be administered to a student in order to
find their developmental spelling stage. The word list continues to progress in levels of
difficulty in order of early, middle, to late in each stage. These progressions begin at the
emergent stage and end at the derivational relations stage. By giving a student the
qualitative spelling inventory, an instructor can see what letter and word patterns a
student needs further instruction with, in their reading and writing practices.

The results are as followed:

Features Total Correct: Mastery

(Yes / No)
 Initial/Final Consonants 7/7 Yes

Short Vowels 5/5 Yes

Digraphs 6/6 Yes

Blends 7/7 Yes

Long Vowels 5/5 Yes

Other Vowels 6/7 Yes

Inflected Endings 3/5 No

Syllable Junctures 4/5 Yes

Unaccented Final Syllables 2/5 No

Harder Suffixes 3/5 No

Bases or Roots 1/5 No

Total Feature Points 49/62

Total Words Spelled 14/25

Correctly

Early Syllables & Affixes

Spelling Stage

Data Interpretation:
Based on the assessment results, Marissa shows mastery of her spelling of initial/final consonant
sounds, short/long vowels, digraphs/blends, and her other vowel sounds. Marissa needs to begin
explicit instruction with words containing inflected endings. This means that she is currently in
the Early Syllables & Affixes spelling stage. Words containing inflected endings are those that
show a change in tense or number. Examples of words within the assessment that Marissa will
continue working on are those that drop the consonant “y” to add “ies” or those that double a
consonant in the middle of the word to show multiple of something. Throughout this spelling
stage, students work on other syllable junctures and final syllables that are unaccented.

2. Elementary Reading Attitude Survey

The Elementary Reading Attitude Survey ( McKenna & Kear, 1990) analyzes how a
student feels towards reading. Each question related to reading has four different Garfield
 pictures drawn. There are four points total a student can score. Four points relate to the
“happiest Garfield” while one point relates to the “very upset Garfield”. While giving this
assessment I read each question aloud to the student and she independently chose which
Garfield picture best described her.

The results are as followed:

Scoring Guide:
4 Points - Happiest Garfield
3 Points- Slightly smiling Garfield
2 Points- Mildly upset Garfield
1 Point- Very upset Garfield

Recreational Reading Academic Reading

1. 2 11. 4

2. 4 12. 2

3. 3 13. 4

4. 4 14. 4

5. 4 15. 4

6. 4 16. 4

7. 2 17. 3

8. 2 18. 2

9. 4 19. 4

10. 4 20. 2

Raw Score: 33/40 33/40

Data Interpretation:
After reviewing these results, Marissa has a positive outlook on her reading experience. When
using these raw scores, there is not a specific score a student needs to receive. Rather, when
looking at the data one can conclude that if a student has a raw score of 45-50 out of total 80
points for both academic and recreational reading categories, they may have a more indifferent
view of reading because they are in the midway of the scale total. Marissa has a total of 66/80
points total which means that as a test administrator I can conclude that she generally has a
happier outlook on her reading experiences inside and outside of the classroom.

3. Informal Decoding Inventory

Authors Mckenna & Stahl (2015) created the Informal Decoding Inventory in order to assess
students’ ability to read words which contain a multitude of word/vowel patterns. In this
assessment, there are two categories. Within each skill test there are ten real words and ten
nonsense words for students to read aloud. The first part of the assessment involves decoding
single-syllable words and part two assesses multisyllabic words. Part two is typically given to
upper elementary students first, and part one can be given to these students if they are having
more difficulty. For Marissa, I have displayed the results from both part one and part two of this
inventory. When deciding if the student mastered a section, these are the following criteria: a
student must read 8 out of 10 real words, anf 7 out of 10 nonsense words.

The results are as followed:

Part 1 Real words Nonsense words Mastery yes/no

Short Vowels 10/10 6/10 No

Consonant Blends and 10/10 9/10 Yes

Digraphs

R-Controlled Vowel 9/10 9/10 Yes

Patterns

Vowel-Consonant-E 5/10 2/10 No

Vowel Teams 9/10 5/10 No

Part 2 Real words Nonsense words Mastery yes/no

Compound Words 9/10 9/10 Yes

Closed Syllables 8/10 5/10 No

Open Syllables 8/10 5/10 No

 Vowel-Consonant-E 7/10 6/10 No
Syllables

R-Controlled Syllables 7/10 9/10 No

Vowel Team Syllables 10/10 4/10 No

Consonant + le Syllables 8/10 8/10 Yes

Data Interpretation:
After administering Part II of this assessment, it seems that Marissa would benefit from
instruction on most components dealing with nonsense words but had an understanding of
compound words, r-controlled syllables, and consonant + le syllable nonsense words. I then
decided to administer Part I of the inventory in order to see if she had mastered her single-
syllable word patterns. Marissa shows mastery in real words with short vowels, vowel pairs, r-
controlled vowel patterns, and consonant digraphs/blends. On the other hand, Marissa began to
substitute other short vowel sounds in her nonsense words. When reading the real words for
vowel-consonant-e patterns, Marissa read the vowel sound as short, and was unable to recognize
that the silent “e” changes these to long vowel sounds. She also began to read the letter “e” at the
end of each nonsense word in this category. Marissa will benefit from explicit decoding
instruction with single-syllable words containing short vowels, words with vowel-consonant-e
patterns, and a variety of vowel teams such as (eg., oe, ea, ee, ui).

4. Qualitative Reading Inventory

Authors Leslie & Caldwell (2017) developed this assessment to help instructors determine a
students’ instructional reading level. A students’ instructional reading level is one that is not at
an independent level because the student needs instructional assistance to fully comprehend the
text. If the examiner does not know the grade in which to begin a child’s assessment, they may
also utilize the diagnostic word lists to decide which level would be best to start the assessments.
After the student reads the selected passage they retell details discussed and answer a set of
comprehension questions.

The results are as followed:

Accuracy:
Independent Level: 98 % accuracy
Instructional Level: 90%-97% accuracy
Frustrational Level: Less than 90% accuracy
 Passage Title/ Level Word Recognition Level Comprehension Level (total
(percent of words read correct/total # of questions)
correctly)

“A Special Birthday for 98% Accuracy 6/8 questions

Rosa”

Level: Three
Lexile Level: 750 Independent Instructional

“ The Friend” 98 % Accuracy 3/8 questions

Level: Three
Lexile Level: 710 Independent Frustrational

“Amelia Earhart” 94% Accuracy 3/8 questions

38%
Level: Four
Lexile: 500 Instructional Frustrational

Data Interpretation:
After reviewing Marissa’s comprehension data, it seems that her instructional level is in 3rd
grade. I tested her on a 4th grade passage titled “Amelia Earhart” which was at an instructional
level for her fluency needs, but her comprehension questions showed she was not fully
comprehending the text. On both of the narrative 3rd grade level passages, Marissa scored at the
independent level with her word recognition skills, at a total of 98 % accuracy. On the first
passage, she answered 6/8 questions correctly showing that overall this 3rd grade leveled passage
would be a great place to start instruction. In the second passage, she answered 3/ 8 questions
correctly which still showed a frustrational level. Between both 3rd grade leveled passages, it
seems that Marissa would benefit from reading strategies that target comprehension questions
that are both explicitly and implicitly found in a text.

5. Oral Reading Fluency

To assess Marissa’s oral reading fluency, I looked at her assessments for the narrative
instructional leveled passage and one of the narrative grade-level passages. Using the
Multidimensional Fluency scale (Zutell & Rasinksi, 1991; adapted by McKenna & Stahl, 2015) I
was able to provide a qualitative summary on multiple dimensions in her prosodic reading
abilities. These abilities include expression/volume, phrasing, smoothness, and pace. The highest
scale score is 4, with the lowest being 2. To provide an accurate words correct per minute
(WCPM) score, the oral reading fluency norms were used (Hasbrouck & Tindal, 2017) which
allows the instructor to see a students approximate reading rate.

Text #1 : “Amelia Earhart” - Grade Level Narrative Text

Words Correct Per Minute: 57

Word Recognition Accuracy Level: 94%

Multidimensional Fluency Scale

Expression and Volume 2/4

Phrasing 2/4

Smoothness 2/4

Pace 2/4

Total Score on Multidimensional

Fluency Rubric 8/16

Text #2 : “ A Special Birthday for Rosa” - Instructional Level Narrative Text

Words Correct Per Minute: 79

Word Recognition Accuracy Level: 98%

Multidimensional Fluency Scale

Expression and Volume 3/4

Phrasing 2/4

Smoothness 1/4

Pace 2/4

Total Score on Multidimensional

Fluency Rubric 8/16
Text #3 : “ The Friend” - Instructional Level Narrative Text

Words Correct Per Minute: 83

Word Recognition Accuracy Level: 98%

Multidimensional Fluency Scale

Expression and Volume 2 /4

Phrasing 3/4

Smoothness 2/4

Pace 2/4

Total Score on Multidimensional

Fluency Rubric 9 /16

Data Interpretation:
When looking at the oral fluency norms established by Hasbrouck & Tindal, Marissa is reading
in the 10th percentile during the Fall of her fourth grade year. According to these percentiles, she
should be reading approximately 94 words correct per minute. For her instructional leveled text
(grade 3) titled “A Special Birthday for Rosa”, Marissa read 79 words correct per minute. This
score is within a few points of the 50th percentile, which is 83 WCPM. In the second 3rd grade
passage titled “ The Friend”, Marissa met this percentile benchmark reading 83 words correct per
minute. The Multidimensional fluency rubric showed that Marissa will benefit from explicit
fluency instruction to practice reading words with expression in more challenging texts, phrasing
groups of words together, and reading at a pace that is smooth without frequent breaks.

Summary of Assessment Results

After analyzing all of the assessment data, Marissa is showing to be a reader at the 3rd
grade instructional level. She shows mastery in her ability to decode many word patterns that are
single-syllable real words in literature that include r-controlled vowels, consonant
digraphs/blends, and vowel pairs. Areas for support that Marissa will benefit from include
phonics based instruction beginning with single syllable words including short vowel, single
vowel-consonant-e patterns, and common vowel pairs. This instruction will benefit Marissa
because she is already at the Early Syllables & Affixes spelling stage which will begin to look at
multisyllabic words. She has a positive outlook on reading and therefore loves to read in and
outside of school. In order to help her gain more meaning from the texts she reads, future
instruction should include fluency & comprehension intervention. With these supports, Marissa
will be able to accurately retell events/details that occur in the text, and infer deeper meanings
that come from text structures and vocabulary.

Instructional Recommendations

Paired / Repeated Fluency Reading

Repeated reading is an instructional recommendation I would suggest in order to improve
Marissa’s overall fluency needs of expression, phrasing, and smoothness. The repeated reading
approach (McKenna & Stahl, 2015) is when a child reads a text multiple times. By having
Marissa reread high quality texts in the classroom, she will automatically become more familiar
with the print and therefore increase her automaticity when reading. Repeated readings will
allow Marissa to spend less time focusing on individual words, and more time on reading with
expression to gain more meaning from what she's reading. Marissa initially shared with me that
she is looking forward to a “Book Buddies” program at her school where she will be reading to
a Kindergarten student. Knowing that she likes to work with others,I think another instructional
method that would be helpful to Marissa is repeated partner readings. Marissa and her partner
can take turns reading the selected passage by the teacher (at least three times) and then reflect
on what their partner read well. A checklist to provide feedback with each partner may be
beneficial. By providing a checklist that states objectives for fluency such as: accuracy, pace,
expression, and smoothness the instructor will see these reflections as more meaningful. To
challenge Marissa, partner reading of a more challenging text would also be beneficial as it
would lend a hand to building her needs for comprehension questioning.

Small Group Read-Aloud Intervention

Based on Marissa’s varying comprehension scores for both 3rd grade level narrative
passages, it seems she needs support focusing on the main ideas presented and referencing the
text to answer explicit and implicit questions. Author Katherine Stahl (2016) mentions the robust
research evidence behind providing students with small group read-aloud instruction. Essentially
this instruction is designed to take a text that was used as a whole-group read aloud, and deliver
follow-up sessions based on the modeled whole class example. Marissa would benefit greatly
from taking part in a small group read-aloud intervention group that includes no more than four
students. Explicit instruction in areas of narrative story structure, inferencing, and theme
identification will allow Marissa the ability to practice these reading elements by providing more
opportunities to discuss the text. Ideally, this group would be most beneficial if the instructor
designates 2-4 days per week and between 15-30 minutes per group session.

Interactive Word Work/Phonics Instruction

As stated in Marissa’s Elementary Spelling Inventory results, she is currently at the Early
Syllables & Affixes stage. She needs to begin with instruction that focuses on inflected endings.
Inflected endings show the change in number or tense. Instruction as previously mentioned will
look at words that drop the consonant “y” to add “ies” or those that double a consonant in the
middle of the word. The results from this inventory also showed that Marissa could use small
group instruction with words that have roots, and unaccented final syllables. Marissa’s Informal
Decoding Inventory shows that she could benefit from word work addressing single-syllable
words containing short vowels, words with vowel-consonant-e patterns, and a variety of vowel
teams such as (eg., oe, ea, ee, ui). In order to address Marissa’s needs based on her spelling and
decoding inventories, explicit phonics instruction activities in these areas are necessary. In her
word study group, Marissa will be working on how to effectively add suffixes such as (-ing, -ed,
-s, and -es), how to identify base words, double the consonant, and drop an -e in exchange for a
-y in order to add on suffixes. Her progression into working with multisyllabic words will begin
with word sorts by categories beginning in single-syllable words. Instructional categories may
also include vowel teams, short vowels, and words with vowel-consonant-e patterns. For
example, if the instructor is working with Marissa on adding the suffix -ing, she will begin
sorting words based on whether the consonants are doubled or not (Bear, Invernizzi, Templeton,
& Johnston, 2016). The instructor can also have her complete word hunts based on her word
sorts. This would involve Marissa looking for words based on the feature being studied during
her own independent reading time. Practice with writing the words used in these word work
sessions and using them in written formats across content areas will greatly improve Marissa’s
word identification skills.

References

Bear, D.R., Invernizzi, M., Templeton, S., & Johnston, F. (2016). Words their way: Word study
for phonics, vocabulary, and spelling instruction. Boston, MA: Pearson.

Hasbrouck, J. & Tindal, G. (2017). An update to compiled ORF norms (Technical Report No.
1702). Eugene, OR, Behavioral Research and Teaching, University of Oregon.

Leslie, L., & Caldwell, J.S. (2017). Qualitative reading inventory-6. Boston, MA: Pearson.

McKenna, M.C., & Stahl, K.A.D. (2015). Assessment for reading instruction (3rd edition).
Guilford: New York.
McKenna, M. C., & Kear, D. J. (1990). Measuring attitudes toward reading: A new tool for
teachers. The Reading Teacher, 46, 626–639.

Stahl, K. A. D. (2016). A New Priority- Comprehension Intervention in the Primary Grades .

The Reading Teacher, 69(6), 627–631.

Zutell, J., & Rasinski, T. V. (1991). Training teachers to attend to their students’ oral reading
fluency. Theory Into Practice, 30(3), 211-217