Peregoy & Boyle: Reading Assessment & Instruction: Ch. 10.

The assessments methods here were more analytical approaches to Reading Assessment as compared to Alternative Assessments of Reading as suggested in Valdez chapter 5. The approaches here were more teacher directed as opposed to the Reading assessments in Valdez where the learners were empowered to self-evaluate, document or chart their progress to show growth , and worked toward a goal or goals. One thing remains same in any situation is that teachers and or assessors need to learn more about their test takers and language learners such as gaining background knowledge and language knowledge. When a teacher gains new students he/she quickly tries to learn everything they can learn about the learners like what do they already know, what their strengths and weaknesses are. With this knowledge of the learners are a set of words they might already know, and possibly if the learner can comprehend. The data maybe attained through an "infinite variety" (as in Shakespeare's Cleopatra). Some of the ways to gain access to what the learner is able to do or lacks are through the tools such as the Informal Reading Inventory (IRI), Running Record, Miscue Analysis, and Guided Reading. Running Records, Miscues, and IRI are related in a way that they are testing fluency. Miscues and IRI's go further than Running Records to test comprehension as well as fluency. IRI's go further to test if the student has "tapped the ceiling" or tested as high as he/she can test to the point at which the learner has difficulty.
The levels stated here in this article are a little too broad for me. I would use this as another means (to see if the learners are at Independent, Instructional, or Frustration Reading levels), however I like the one Valdez has in Figure 5.18. The Assessment that I use monthly is a Running Record called AimsWeb where I assess the fluency of the child and count the words read per minute and note the errors he/she makes. I do that for three readings and then take the median of each ( middle # of words correct and # of errors). This does not test comprehension. The LY end of level test for Level 2 does provide a short Miscue Analysis where the students read a short story and then aswer 2-3 comprehension questions. This is a hit or miss since the comprehension part is in standardized format and students get only 2 questions.
I think my strengths as a reading teacher are the number of times I read aloud to the class, and mediate the process, I explain and have little discussions as we go along. I read aloud non-fiction, fiction, and chapter books daily. Some of these books are picture books and some are Alaskana books, or books that originated elsewhere. I strive to expose the class to a wide range of literature genres, and discuss these often. The authors here stressed Read Alouds. The other strength here is Silent Sustained Reading. They stressed it's best used after lunch and uninterrupted, and unreported, where learners self select their reading material from books, newspapers, magazines, and other fun literature. This works well because the students are engaged, they usually select a wide range of books, and they want to share a vocabulary they found that we have discussed before. This happens daily!
One thing that sounded interesting is the Echo Reading. I have done something similar to this but not for assessing purposes. I would like to try that. One chart that I liked here is Figure 10.9 the one about Guided Reading. I have thought about this but have not had time to begin to have small reading groups. It's a lot to prepare for since I am the only adult being in my classroom so it's a lot of training, and instructing students on how to work constructively in small groups. That is something I can try if I needed to. Right now, we seem to be getting along fairly well without. (No Barking At Print Here!):D