So its now the end of January and have gathered all of the scores for the core areas of intervention.  These were:

  • Aimsweb
  • Phonological Awareness – 2Peas
  • Magic 100 Words
  • Data-Based Intervention Benchmarks (open this to see the scores for the 3 areas, I think the graphs are really powerful in showing growth in all areas).

Now I will write this reflection using the predictions I posted previously.  This will  help focus my thoughts and share how these results will impact further instruction. I strongly believe the only reason for testing and data collection is to inform further instruction particularly on the micro-level where LS support is pivotal in provision of targetted instruction.

Here are my previous predictions:

  • there will be growth for all students in at least 2 of the areas.

Now based on the data collected across the grade level and within 3 areas there was definite growth for the majority of students in all areas. Of course there were one or two students who as expected did not make obvious growth particularly on the standardised Aimsweb.

  • there might be some students in Aimsweb who may not show growth for WRF (due to the nature of their learning difficulty and that expectations have shifted from Fall to Winter)

Of the two students who I was particularly concerned with, one did make growth in the WRF componant, however, the other student did not (but there were many factors hindering a true reflection what he was able to do as the testing situation, the format of words in the list and timed nature were really things that worked against truly showing what he was able to do).

  • some of the highest need students may not make as much growth despite the level of intervention.

Of the highest needs students, only one of them did not make growth in the Aimsweb WRF part, but when looking at all the other data points there were very positive growths in the areas of phonological awareness in particular.  There was also small growth in 100 Words.  However, if we understand the nature of reading acquisition, phonological awareness and phonic understanding are crucial and need to be consolidated and then there is the phase to apply phonic/letter /sound to simple patterns.  Once these are learned and acquired then we are able to work on developing fluency.  Aimsweb assumes acquisition and measures fluency.  Obviously there is a group of students who fall within the acquisition phase and so fluency is not within their readiness.

  • some students who were Well Below Average at the BOY (13 Students in August) may move into the Below Average range at MOY.

Well when I look at the MOY reporting, it shows that now only 6 students fall within the Well Below range with composite scores ranging from 0 – 22, with a further 6 students falling within the Below Average range.  This is really encouraging as they have all moved in their WRF fluency but its the Oral Reading componant which also impacted their overall rating.  However, 12 students are still at the High Risk category (but looking at the overall scores this is a small but expected number).

  • Some students who were Below Average at the BOY (8students) may move into the Average range at MOY (this might be optimistic).

The students were falling within the well below ranging moved into Below Average with 2 or 3 students moving into the moderate range with were within the average range.

  • the biggest growth will be in Phonological Awareness

Now this was a surprise, as when I look over the scores it appears that there was continued growth in the Phonological growth but the growth for the 100 Words appears greater and far more obviously when presented in graphic form.  I think because the initial levels for sight words was so low for some students that growth was most obvious and marked.  Its seriously encouraging how much growth they made.

Based on these scores and growth I have modified the intervention and added aspects that would help students with completing the formalised testing nature of the Aimsweb.  I have scared some warm-up procedures as reading readiness warmups etc.  As well, the focus will be shifting from instruction in phonological awareness to making direct connections to more phonic-based work with word families etc.  The scores are encouraging and have ensured that they have been shared with teams and TA’s who are primariliy responsible for the ‘drill and practice’ for sight words etc.  I look forward to the next phase of intervention.