Reading Observation Assignment: Guidelines And Rubric

Reading Observation Assignment Guidelines and Rubric

Conduct three systematic observations of a single fledgling or developing reader, noting their reading strategies and behaviors using a specified record-keeping system. These observations should occur in a less formal setting than an assessment environment. Create an appropriate grade-level cloze passage for the student to complete, then analyze their comprehension and instructional reading level. Administer and score the Names Test following provided procedures to assess decoding strategies. Write a comprehensive narrative summarizing the student's behaviors observed during reading, highlighting strengths and weaknesses based on the assessments. Develop an instructional plan addressing these areas of need, providing specific strategies. Submit all observation records, assessment documentation, the narrative, and the instructional plan as attachments via the designated submission platform, including scanned copies of all record sheets and test results.

Paper For Above instruction

The evaluation of early reading development through systematic observation and targeted assessment is essential to informed instruction tailored to individual student needs. This paper discusses the process of conducting comprehensive observations of a developing reader, administering formative assessments like the cloze passage and Names Test, analyzing results, and designing effective instructional strategies.

Introduction

Early literacy development is a complex blend of decoding, comprehension, and strategic reading behaviors. Teachers need to observe and assess these skills in naturalistic settings, allowing for authentic snapshot of a student's capabilities and challenges. Systematic observation, coupled with specific assessments such as the cloze passage and the Names Test, enables educators to gather meaningful data on student performance, which informs targeted instruction. This paper emphasizes the importance of multiple observations, appropriate assessment tools, and the creation of supportive instructional plans aimed at fostering literacy development.

Systematic Observation of Reading Behaviors

The first step involves conducting at least three systematic observations of a single student engaging in reading activities. These observations should be carried out in a less formal setting, such as a classroom reading corner or during guided reading, to encourage natural behaviors. Using a structured record-keeping system, such as a running record or observation checklist aligned with chapter 6 of the instructional resource, allows for consistent and detailed data collection. The focus should be on identifying strategies like decoding, use of context clues, predictions, self-correcting behaviors, and metacognitive awareness. Observations reveal strengths, such as accurate decoding or strong comprehension skills, and weaknesses, including decoding errors or comprehension difficulties.

Creating and Administering the Cloze Passage

The next step involves designing a grade-appropriate cloze passage tailored to the student's reading level. This passage is intended to assess comprehension in a context familiar to the student. After creation, the student is asked to complete the passage, and their responses are analyzed to determine their understanding of the text. This analysis offers insights into the student's ability to predict, infer, and integrate prior knowledge. The process of creating such passages involves selecting meaningful texts and deleting words strategically to challenge the student's inferencing skills without causing frustration.

Conducting the Names Test

The Names Test is a decoding assessment that examines how the student applies phonetic and structural decoding strategies. Following the procedure outlined in Learning Module 2, the teacher administers the test, records the student's responses, and scores their decoding efficiency. The test helps identify whether the student relies on phonetic cues, visual memory, or context, and highlights specific decoding strengths and weaknesses. For example, a student may decode regularly spelled words accurately but struggle with unfamiliar words, indicating areas for targeted instruction.

Analysis of Observations and Assessments

Combining data from the observations and assessments, the teacher forms a comprehensive profile of the student's reading abilities. For instance, consistent decoding struggles during observation paired with poor performance on the Names Test suggest decoding as a core weakness. Conversely, strengths in comprehension responses within the cloze passage may indicate adequate meaning-making skills. Identifying these patterns is critical for designing an effective instructional plan.

Developing an Instructional Plan

The instructional plan hinges on targeted strategies addressing identified weaknesses while reinforcing strengths. For decoding difficulties, interventions might include phonics-based activities, word families, and explicit decoding instruction. To enhance comprehension, strategies such as reciprocal teaching, visualization, and questioning techniques can be incorporated. The plan must be explicit, child-centered, and adaptable based on ongoing formative assessments. It should also involve engaging activities that motivate the student to apply new skills in authentic reading contexts.

Conclusion

Assessing a developing reader through systematic observation and targeted testing provides actionable insights into their reading profile. By carefully documenting behaviors, analyzing assessment results, and designing responsive instruction, educators can foster meaningful progress in early literacy. The detailed narrative and instructional plan serve not only as a reflection of current capabilities but also as a guide for future instruction that can be tailored to each learner's evolving needs.

References

• Clay, M. M. (2016). Running Records for Classroom Teachers (2nd ed.). Heinemann.
• Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6-10.
• Hargrave, M., & Sénéchal, M. (2000). A bookreading intervention with a balanced attention to print and story. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(1), 10-32.
• Hiebert, E. H., &immer, P. (2000). Reading comprehension strategies: Theory, instruction, and research. National Reading Conference Yearbook, 49, 69–83.
• National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. NIH Publication No. 00-4769.
• Piaget, J. (1954). The development of reasoning. The developmental psychology. Harper & Brothers.
• Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective. Pearson.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
• Waxman, H. C., & Booth, C. (2010). Scaffolding language and literacy development: Strategies for English learners in diverse early childhood settings. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37(1), 31–38.
• Yopp, H. K. (1988). The yopp method for assessing phonemic segmentation skills. The Reading Teacher, 41(6), 516–518.