Techniques for Assessing Students' Potential for Learning

Techniques for Assessing Students' Potential for LearningAuthor(s): Karen D. WoodSource: The Reading Teacher, Vol. 41, No. 4 (Jan., 1988), pp. 440-447Published by: Wiley on behalf of the International Reading AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20199808 .

Accessed: 25/06/2014 07:58

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Wiley and International Reading Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to The Reading Teacher.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.73.86 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 07:58:08 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ira

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20199808?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Techniques for assessing students9 potential for learning

You can modify assessment instruments to make placement decisions. Useful with basal readers, the techniques can be

adapted to other material.

Karen D. Wood

Classroom teachers are aware that stu

dent performance can vary markedly depending upon the demands of the

reading tasks. Some students compre

hend better after reading silently rather than orally. Others read narrative ma

terial more proficiently than exposi tory material. Still others show

improvement when prompted by the teacher with additional background knowledge or probing questions.

Given these variations in students'

reading behavior, the use of only one

testing source can mislead us about students' potential for learning. It is

necessary to assess reading ability un der varied circumstances to determine students' optimal levels of perform ance.

The work of Feuerstein (Feuerstein, Rand, and Hoffman, 1979) points to

the importance of determining stu dents' potential for learning as part of the assessment process. While his ef forts were aimed at intelligence testing of handicapped individuals, his philos ophy is readily applicable to reading assessment.

Feuerstein contrasts his dynamic ap proach to assessment with static ap proaches which attempt to quantify behavior in terms of single test scores. To implement dynamic assessment, 4

changes are required: (1) The test instrument must be re

structured to allow the examiner to ac

tively teach while determining the effects of this teaching on the exam

inee's performance.

(2) The examination situation must

change from a standardized, scripted monologue to one which encourages oral exchanges and interaction be tween examiner and examinee.

(3) The examiner should look for

440 The Reading Teacher January 1988



"peaks of performance" which take the examinee beyond the initial level and allow a broader demonstration of capa

bility. (4) The focus should be on a pro

cess rather than a product orientation to learning.

Varied testing is better

Dynamic assessment can be consid ered one dimension of the movement

toward a more naturalistic perspective, in which students are observed in their

reading groups contributing back

ground knowledge, making inferences and predictions, and reading and re

telling the events of a selection

(Moore, 1983). They are also ob served in their content area classrooms

while determining word meanings from context, responding after a

teacher demonstration, or engaging in self questioning.

Goodman (1985) refers to this pro cess as "kidwatching," Cunningham (1982) calls it simply "diagnosis by ob

servation," and Moore (1983) prefers the more global term "naturalistic as

sessment." In an individual testing situ

ation, the teacher/examiner uses

various intervention techniques to pro vide the student with a number of con

ditions under which to demonstrate further potential.

More evidence of the need to vary the testing situation to determine learn

ing potential can be found in studies by Labov (1972) which show that individ uals respond differently under the in

fluence of different examiners.

Similarly, Harste and Carey (1979) espouse the notion of "print setting" which stresses the importance of the situational context in which print is en

countered for triggering specific asso

ciations from memory. The abundant research on print setting reveals the ex tent to which comprehension can be al tered by merely making changes in the social setting (Baldwin and Readence, 1979; Carey, Harste, and Smith, 1981)

or in instructional conditions (Goetz et

al., 1983; Pichert and Anderson,

1977). This article uses the concepts of dy

namic and naturalistic assessment as

the rationale for modifying instru ments used in making placement deci

sions. While Cioffi and Carney (1983) have demonstrated the applicability of

Feuerstein's work to standardized de

vices, this article will show the rele vance to informal, teachermade

assessment instruments.

Since research indicates that the ba

sal reader is used in more than 90% of

American classrooms today (Educa tion Products Information Exchange, 1977; Wiesendanger and Birlem,

1981), my examples use basal reader

material. However, the techniques are

readily adaptable to library books and content area material as well.

Appropriate placement The prevalent diagnostic concern of the classroom teacher is determining if

students are placed in materials appro

priate to their reading ability. Often

used for this purpose are the invento

ries which accompany basal reading programs?usually a series of graded word lists and passages with

openended questions. In addition to the fact that these in

ventories are static devices which al low little room for flexible scoring and

interpretation, other concerns can be

raised regarding their efficacy for

placement decisions. First, usually 1

passage of 200 or more words is used to represent the books for each grade level, giving students a single opportu

nity to demonstrate proficiency at that

level.

Second, since basal readers contain varied genres, including poetry, plays, stories, and exposition, a single pas

sage does not permit students to dem onstrate their abilities under these different conditions. Third, research has shown that there is much intratext

Techniques for assessing students' potential 441



variation in readability in basal readers

(Bradley and Ames, 1977). Other commercial inventories, simi

larly constructed, are also insufficient

for placement purposes. Like the basal

inventory, commercial devices usually use 1 passage to represent each grade level, but the passages are independent of classroom materials. Therefore, their use is best restricted to general assessment, as one of many devices

used to portray overall student per formance.

To scrutinize a standardized test

score and conclude that a student is ap

propriately or inappropriately placed in classroom material is also errone

ous. Such tests were never intended for

placement purposes but, instead, de

signed specifically to compare stu

dents' scores with those of the

population on whom the test was

normed (Farr and Carey, 1986).

Merely relying on the judgment of

previous teachers is also inadequate since students' abilities fluctuate given

changes in teachers and materials. The rule of thumb for determining if

material is appropriate for a given stu

dent is simply to have the student read

from that material. Assessing students in a medium different from the one in

which they are asked to perform could be termed "distancing the test from the task."

What is needed then is a structured

approach to determine how an individ ual handles the reading of actual text

book material under conditions which

simulate the classroom situation. Such

information can be gathered through the Group Comprehension Matrix and

the Individual Comprehension Profile.

Group Comprehension Matrix While one-to-one assessment is often

necessary to determine placement, it

should not be the sole method used.

Since most reading instruction takes

place in a group or reading circle, a

valid procedure would be to ascertain

how well given students function in

this setting. Thus the students are as

sessed under teacher oriented condi tions during the directed reading activity.

One way to organize observations

gleaned from this type of assessment is with the Group Comprehension Matrix

(Wood, in press). Through this matrix, the teacher can focus on the perform ance of the whole group or an individ ual's functioning in the group setting.

The matrix shown in Figure 1 gives an overview of how well one group of students comprehended the story "The

Mandarin and the Magician" with teacher assistance in the form of Stauf

fer's (1969) Directed Reading-Think ing Activity. Some categories to

observe are the extent of students'

background knowledge, predicting and

inferring abilities, capacity for trans

lating a selection into their own words, and the ability to read smoothly and

fluently.

Examining the matrix horizontally, it appears that students in the group

profiled have difficulty inferring infor mation or "reading between the lines" and are unable to determine word

meanings from context. These data

along with their insufficient back

ground knowledge should immediately suggest to the teacher that more de tailed information must be provided to

help the students visualize the setting and comprehend the story line.

This inability to make inferences and

predictions could be story specific, that is, limited to this selection alone.

Only through future assessments could

the teacher determine if a pattern of need has developed.

Examining the matrix vertically, we see that Jason appears to be having the

most difficulty, although teacher com

ments indicate that his recall is good and that his performance improves in a

one-to-one situation. It may be that

reading in front of a group interferes with his inferential comprehension.




Figure 1

Group Comprehension Matrix

Story The Mandarin and the Magician

Genre: Narrative (realistic,QantasyJ

Poetry

Plays

Exposition

Makes predictions about story

Participates in the discussion

Answers questions on all levels

Determines word meanings through context

Reads smoothly and fluently

Can retell selection using own words

Comprehends after silent reading

Can read "between the lines"

Possesses broad background knowledge

Date October 14*

Grade 4th

New student - Oct. 1st

CD

N

CO c to

g "> CO

Q

N

Comments: The students had much difficulty comprehending the story until I provided much

more background information. Their predictions were not as accurate and abundant as

usual?largely due to their lack of knowledge of Chinese dynasties. Jason remains very quiet

unless asked specific questions. He is much more responsive one-to-one. While his recall is

good, his oral reading is very choppy Teresa is always willing to volunteer any answers al

though her recall is on the literal level. Ryan may need to move up another level?will test

individually.

Often

Sometimes

Seldom

Not observed

+

S

Words to review:

dynasty

Mandarin

queue




CD o CO

O

o ?s s 0. c o w c

CM 0)

" o o

3

>

c

CD E CO

CD E E o

?

CO Q. o E

? o O o

o g CD c Q) co

CD 3 Q O)

OC E

c 0

O) ? < >

CO >s CD * CE

0 4 c CO

O) c CO

Il II II i-CMO)^

?pj ?uunp is|ssv

qeooA ?uiqoeeiejd

|mou>| punoj?>ioBa

Pipejd 'jejui

lieoej peqojd

IIB09J 88JJ

uoiPijuoN

ASBJUBJ

uo|P!i 0!iS||B9y

S?B|d

?jjaod

iuens

|BJO

0T CD .

_l Q.

C co

Q) c: "? co

CD 3

0 CD > r^ 0

_l Q.

c: o o CO CO

c I

? s c .o CO CO

cojS 9 m

O Q

co O

fl> g ^ CO

_ 00 0 CD > T 0

_l Q.

CO 5

??

0 ?P CO 5^

co ̂ e s .0 CD .q -Q s:

SS

2 P s? "*-? 0 E^ Eco o ? co ̂

0 O > T 0

_l Q.

D)

"5 c co

O

a

co ?

9>

s*

11

0 CD > O) 0

-I QL

?

0

0 0 5 A.

CO 5 .

43 0

|8 8 S S> o

O 2

CD 0 a: a

0 CO > CD 0

_l CL

p co

C 0 C 9?

I o O 0 ? C

o>

"5 o

S?

co ?

g'S eu 0 O

S*

_ O) 0 T > i 0

_l Q.




For him, the teacher may want to use more silent reading or a paired read

ing, retelling, and discussion approach as alternatives for future sessions.

Teresa seems to be somewhat impul sive and may need assistance in mak

ing inferences and in monitoring her own comprehension.

Ryan just entered this school on Oc tober 1st and, judging from the quality and superiority of his responses, may need to be moved to the next level. Further assessment with the Individual

Comprehension Profile would be help ful to ascertain appropriate placement.

The Group Comprehension Matrix should be used no more than once a

month, although the observant teacher

may continue to make mental notes re

garding students' strengths and weak nesses throughout all reading sessions. As with the Individual Comprehension Profile described next, student per formance should be analyzed using different types of prose.

Similar matrices can be developed which outline tasks common to the content fields. In addition to the cate

gories listed in Figure 1, alternative abilities observed might be "assimi lates new vocabulary pretaught," "mon

itors own comprehension," "offers

background knowledge," "successfully completes textbook assignments," to name a few.

Individual Comprehension Profile The Individual Comprehension Profile has been modified and adapted for classroom use from one proposed by Cunningham et al. (1983). As can be seen in Figure 2, the matrix is a tea

chermade device for organizing and

determining patterns of reading behav ior under varied conditions.

A student whose performance is in

question is asked to read directly from the basal reader under conditions

which are changed to coordinate with the tasks expected in the classroom.

The 4 conditions assessed are listed

across the top of the matrix and are de scribed next.

Type of reading ? Students

should be permitted to demonstrate both their oral and silent reading abili ties. Many students are more profi cient in one mode.

Genres ? Since some students

may show a preference for a particular literary form in terms of interest, abil

ity, or both, the assessment should in clude samples which represent the varied contents of the text. While shown here in conjunction with a basal

reader, the format is also appropriate for content area material. Suggested categories for a social studies text

might be comparison and contrast, cause and effect, vocabulary in con

text, interpreting charts, maps and

graphs, to name a few.

Mode of recall- Free or probed retelling measures give students more

"freedom of recall" (Wood, 1985), al

lowing them to use their own experi ences to attach importance to textual information. Students do not have to

respond by guessing what the teacher is thinking but instead can associate in formation in any order and demon strate a broader range of knowledge.

This is preferred over requiring stu dents to answer a list of openended questions, recognize the correct alter

native, or fill in a missing word or

phrase. In addition, students' abilities to infer missing elements and predict logical outcomes can be assessed

through this prompted questioning procedure.

Degree of guidance?Adhering strictly to the administrative directions for commercial inventories means the examiner cannot assist the examinee in

any manner. Such a static approach fails to illustrate the dynamic, ever

changing process of comprehending. Using dynamic assessment, the

teacher should continually try different methods to determine how a student learns best. For example, should a stu




dent exhibit fluency problems and

sketchy recall on a text passage, the teacher may preteach significant obsta cle words and relate important back

ground knowledge to see if the

problems are alleviated. The teacher may also provide assist

ance during the reading to determine what metacognitive strategies the stu

dent possesses for achieving meaning and coherence. Such assistance may include asking the student if what was

just read made sense and, if not, what word or words are unclear; or it may include instructing the student to read ahead to determine the meaning or

pronunciation of an unknown word.

In concert with the current thinking in reading, the teacher should contin

ually ask the question "Is the student

comprehending?" This can be deter mined by using a scale such as the fol

lowing:

Overall comprehension Does not comprehend 1

Comprehends some of the time 2

Comprehends most of the time 3

Comprehends all of the time 4

As Figure 2 shows, Eric's reading on level 22 was choppy at first, suggesting possible discomfort with the testing situation. After a few trials, however, it was evident that he had complete

control over the vocabulary and com

prehension and needed no teacher as

sistance.

On level 3, he had difficulty recog

nizing some of the words. Apparently, some that were not in his reading vo

cabulary were in his hearing vocabu

lary (e.g., trial, beautiful, ambulance,

emergency). Other words (e.g. Red

Cross, swerved), when pretaught in a

meaningful, oral context, became

clear to him and aided his subsequent retelling. The teacher therefore con

cluded that, with adequate guidance, Eric can benefit from instruction in the

3, level basal reader. In general, it is best to start with the

basal below the student's anticipated

placement and proceed to a higher level as needed. This allows the stu

dent to experience success at the onset

and alleviates the anxiety of testing. Generally, an intuitive teacher will know after a few readings if a move

ment above or below the current mate

rial is necessary.

After a few experiences with the In dividual Comprehension Profile, ad ministration time is decreased, as teachers become more attuned to the

specific strengths and weaknesses of their students. Consequently, this type of placement device is more informa tive and less time consuming than the informal reading inventory.

A final note

Assessment for placement purposes should not be a once a year event at the

beginning of school. One-time testing results in "basal labeling" and "basal

tracking," where current placement is determined by the previous year's placement, and progress is determined

by intermittent skills testing (Wood, 1984). Left unexplored in such an ap

proach is how well the students can

comprehend the actual basal reader se

lections. Consequently, students may

be perpetually labeled in the low read

ing group and tracked throughout the basal reader with no recognition of

possible gains in performance. With the techniques described in this

article, assessment is viewed as a dy namic, ongoing process designed to

evaluate students' potential for learning under natural conditions. As such, these techniques assess students in the act of comprehending while the teacher is in the act of teaching.

Wood is Coordinator of Reading-Mid dle Level Education Programs in the

Department of Curriculum and In struction at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. She is particu larly interested in translating research

and theory into classroom practice.




References Baldwin, R. Scott, and John E. Readence. "Critical Read

ing and Perceived Authority." Journal of Reading, vol. 22 (April 1979), pp. 617-22.

Bradley, John M., and Wilbur S. Ames. "Readability Pa rameters of Basal Readers." Journal of Reading Behav ior, vol. 9 (Summer 1977), pp. 175-83.

Carey, Robert F., Jerome C Harste, and Sharon L. Smith. "Contextual Constraints and Discourse Processes: A Replication Study." Reading Research Quarterly, vol. 16, no. 2(1981), pp. 201-12.

Cioffi, Grant, and John J. Carney. "Dynamic Assessment of Reading Disabilities." The Reading Teacher, vol. 36 (April 1983), pp. 764-75.

Cunningham, Patricia M. "Diagnosis by Observation." In

Approaches to the Informal Evaluation of Reading, edited by John J. Pikulski and Timothy Shanahan. Newark, DE: International Reading Association, 1982.

Cunningham, Patricia M., Sharon Arthur Moore, James W. Cunningham, and David W. Moore. Reading in Elemen tary Classrooms: Strategies and Observations. New York, NY: Longman, 1983.

Education Products Information Exchange. Report on a National Study of the Quality of Instructional Materials Most Used by Teachers and Learners. Technical Report No. 76. New York, NY: EPIE Institute, 1977.

Farr, Roger, and Robert F. Carey. Reading: What Can Be Measured? Newark, DE: International Reading Associ ation, 1986.

Feuerstein, Reuven, Ya'acov Rand, and Mildred B. Hoff man. The Dynamic Assessment of Retarded Perform ance. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press, 1979.

Goetz, Ernest T, Diane L. Schallert, Ralph E. Reynolds, and Dean I. Radin. "Reading in Perspective: What Real Cops and Pretend Burglars Look for in a Story." Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 75 (August 1983), pp. 500-610.

Goodman, Yetta M. "Kidwatching- Observing Children in the Classroom." In Observing the Language Learner, edited by Angela Jaggar and M. Trika Smith-Burke. Newark, DE: International Reading Association, 1985.

Harste, Jerome C, and Robert F. Carey. "Comprehension as Setting." In Monograph in Language and Reading Studies: New Perspectives on Comprehension, edited by Jerome C Harste and Robert F. Carey. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University School of Educa tion, 1979.

Labov, William. Language in the Inner City. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1972.

Moore, David W. "A Case for Naturalistic Assessment of

Reading Comprehension." Language Arts, vol. 60 (No vember/December 1983), pp. 957-69.

Pichert, James W., and Richard C Anderson. "Taking Dif ferent Perspectives on a Story." Journal of Educational

Psychology, vol. 69 (August 1977), pp. 309-15. Stauffer, Russell G. Directing Reading Maturity as a Cogni

tive Process. New York, NY: Harper and Row, 1969. Wiesendanger, Katherine, and Ellen Birlem. "A Critical

Look at the Reading Approaches and Grouping Pat terns Currently Used in the Primary Grades." Reading

Horizons, vol. 22 (Fall 1981), pp. 54-58. Wood, Karen D. "Evaluating Progress in the Language

Arts." In Language Arts Instruction and the Beginning Teacher: A Practical Guide, edited by Carl R. Personke and Dale D. Johnson. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, in press.

Wood, Karen D. "Free Associational Assessment: An Al ternative to Traditional Testing." Journal of Reading, vol. 29 (November 1985), pp. 106-11.

Wood, Karen D. "Read First, Test Later: Meeting the Needs of the 'Overskilled Reader.'

" Reading Horizons,

vol. 24 (Winter 1984), pp. 133-40.

'I was in Headstart.'




Documents

Techniques for Assessing Students' Potential for Learning