The document discusses assessment and identification of struggling readers in primary grades. It outlines goals of sharing resources to effectively assess struggling readers and inform about necessary assessments. It provides a rationale for early assessment and identifies who struggling readers are. It describes four types of assessments - screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring, and outcome. For each type, it outlines their purpose and provides example resources teachers can use. It emphasizes the importance of a comprehensive, balanced approach to assessment to identify reader needs and guide instruction and interventions.

1. By: Elizabeth Rath and Abby Herman
CI 5431
Dr. David O’Brien
Summer 2013
Assessment and
Identification of
Struggling Readers in the
Primary Grades

2. GOALS
• To share resources that teachers can use to be most
effective when assessing and identifying struggling readers
in our classrooms.
• Inform our audience of the state of assessment and
necessity for purposeful, meaningful assessments that
drive-instruction and classroom interventions.

3. RATIONALE
Assessment of foundational reading skills is integral for young
readers' success in literacy, before self efficacy suffers
"The rationale for early assessment lie in (a) research on reading development that
indicates the importance of basic skills for future success and (b) classroom evidence
that early diagnosis and remediation of reading difficulties can improve children's
reading achievement"
(Paris S. Hoffman J., 2004)
"A child who is a poor reader in first grade is 88% more likely to remain a poor reader
in 4th grade" (Juel, 1988)
"The early years are the focus for the prevention of reading difficulties" (Clay, 1993)

4. RATIONALE
Comprehensive, balanced literacy assessments will allow
teachers to identify and target the areas in which our struggling
readers need support.
"Current reading assessment practice reflects a series of imbalances that influence
teaching and learning. As teachers, we are challenged to provide effective instruction
for all students. Effective instruction depends on assessment that helps teachers and
students move toward and attain daily and annual reading goals."
(Afflerbach et. al, 2011)
"A single assessment cannot adequately represent the complexity of a child's reading
development."
(Paris S. Hoffman J., 2004)

5. Who Are Struggling Readers?
1. Students with biological difference, i.e. dyslexia (Pressley,
2006)
2. Readers of lower than average intelligence or "Garden
Variety" (Stanovich, 2001)
3. Poor readers of average intelligence but victims of poor
instruction (Pressley, 2006)
4. Typically achieving students who feel like poor readers
(O'Brien, 2008)

6. CRITICAL FINDINGS
We have organized our critical findings into four categories of
assessment. After we present each category and it's findings, we
will supply resources for professional development that you
could use in your schools.

7. Four Types of Assessments
http://reading.uoregon.edu/cia/assessment/assess_types.php
• Screening - Designed as a first step in identifying children who may be at
high risk for delayed development or academic failure and in need of further
diagnosis of their need for special services or additional reading instruction.
• Diagnostic - Helps teachers plan instruction by providing in-depth
information about students' skills and instructional needs.
• Progress Monitoring - Determines through frequent measurement if
students are making adequate progress or need more intervention to
achieve grade-level reading outcomes.
• Outcome - Provides a bottom-line evaluation of the effectiveness of the
reading program in relation to established performance levels.

8. Screening
• Given to all students to identify those who may be at risk for
reading struggles.
• Given at least 3 times a year to prevent "false negatives".
• The screening measures will change as students gather new
skills, but should be reflective of the skill set they should
already have.

9. Screening cont.
• Screening assessments give you a first glimpse of the child as
a reader, so you can determine who may be in need of further
diagnosis and intervention. Screening tools should not be used
in isolation - it's like trying to determine why a basketball team
lost based solely on the score. (Afflerbach et. al. 2011)
Sources:
Hall, S. (n.d.). Helpful assessment for struggling young readers. Retrieved from
http://www.greatschools.org/special-education/LD-ADHD/742-struggling-young-readers.gs
Torgesen, J. K. (2002). The prevention of reading difficulties. Journal of School Psychology,
40(1), 7-26.

10. Screening Resources
Student Inventory and interviews
(An article by Yetta Goodman about reading interviews)
Get Ready to Read
ELORS

11. Diagnostic Assessments
• After screening assessments have indicated a student may
be struggling, or after progress monitoring tools show that a
student is not making adequate progress, a diagnostic
assessment should be administered.
• Diagnostics will help target the specific areas in which
students can improve.
• Using the information from a diagnostic assessment, we can
create learner profiles to tailor instruction to specific needs.
Source:
Lipson , M., Chomsky-Higgins, P., & Kanfer, J. (2011). Diagnosis: The missing ingredient in
rti assessment. The Reading Teacher, 65(3), 204-208.

12. Diagnostic Resources
Specific skills focused assessments - alphabetics,
phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, etc.
(these may be targeted assessments that you already use in your classroom)
DIBELS
DRA

13. Diagnostic Resources
Jan Richardson's Observation Guides
Emergent
Early
Transitional

14. Diagnostic Resources
Assessing Reading Skills
From Reading Rockets'
PBS television series
Launching Young Readers

15. Progress Monitoring
• Given 3 times per year for all students, at least monthly for
struggling readers.
• If previously identified students are not making progress,
change the intervention. If students not previously identified
as struggling appear to be stagnating, continue with a
diagnostic assessment.

16. Progress Monitoring cont.
• Progress monitoring should be a balance of qualitative and
quantitative: observation and data-driven
• "A robust classroom assessment program continually
provides detailed information about students' current
competencies and next steps." (Afflerbach, 2011)
Source:
Safer, N., Bootel, J., & Halland Coviello, R. (2006, 09 28). Improving student outcomes
through progress monitoring. Retrieved from http://www.studentprogress.org/doc/VASEA9-
28-06.pdf

17. Progress Monitoring Resources
Guided reading observations
(A source to defend the importance and usefulness of guided reading in the classroom)
Iaquinta, A. (2006). Guided reading: A research based response to the challenges of
early reading instruction. Early Childhood Educational Journal, 33(6).
Curriculum-Based Measures (CBM)
(A powerpoint presentation about progress monitoring and the effectiveness of CBM)
National Center on Student Progress Monitoring
(Site provides many resources for classroom use, and professional development)

18. Progress Monitoring Resources
Jan Richardson's Reading Progress Log
This works well for tracking student progress and is useful as a tool to see
where further diagnosis is needed to ensure all students are progressing.
.

19. Outcome Assessment
• Given to determine how students are performing in relation to
each other.
• Can help teachers realize the efficacy of
instruction/intervention.
• Are not high quality tools for driving instruction. (Afflerbach,
2011)
• Can be used as a screening tool in some instances (ex:
looking at last year's test data to see who may be in need of
further diagnosis)

20. Outcome Assessment Resources
Organizing comprehensive data and using multiple assessments
to identify areas of difficulty for students
Rubin, J. (2011). Organizing and evaluating results from multiple reading assessments.
The Reading Teacher, 64(8), 606-611.
End of unit assessments
Standardized assessments
*Many outcome assessment tools are mandated by district, state or federal government
or are related to classroom curricula.

21. Other Helpful Resources for Assessment
University of Oregon Center on Teaching and
Learning - Big Ideas in Beginning Reading
Further explains the four categories of assessment, and their uses.
Reading Rockets
About - about the reading rockets site
Advisors - who are those on the advisory panel?
Struggling Readers - why to readers struggle?
Assessment Process - compilation of assessment related articles
Target the Problem - web-based tool to help teachers and families provide support to
their struggling readers
Guided Reading with Dr. Jan Richardson
A large collection of assessment and observation tools that can be implemented as part
of a guided reading program in the classroom

22. "Best Practices"
Assessment practice in the classroom should be reflective of our
understanding of the four assessment types and their purposes.
Each type is meaningful on its own, but in order to identify and
best serve our struggling readers, we must use
a balanced approach.
This comprehensive method of assessment will allow teachers to
target specific reading needs so that effective, data-driven
interventions can be provided for our to help our struggling
readers succeed.

23. Works Cited
Afflerbach, P., Kim, J., Elliker Crassas, M., & Cho, B. (2011). Best practices in literacy assessment. In L.
Morrow & L. B. Gambrell (Eds.), Best Practices in Literacy. Instruction (4th ed., pp. 319-340). New
York, New York: The Guilford Press.
Clay, M. M. (1993). An observation survey of early literacy achievement. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann
Juel, C. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of fifty-four children from first through fourth
grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 437-447.
O'Brien, D. G., & Dillon, D. R. (2008). The role of motivation in engaged reading of adolescents. In K.
Hinchman & H. Sheridan-Thomas (Eds.), Best practices in adolescent literacy instruction New York, New
York: Guilford Press.
Paris, S., & Hoffman, J. (2004). Reading assessments in kindergarten through third grade: Findings from
the center for the improvement of early reading achievement. The Elementary School Journal ,
105(2), 199-217.
Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching. (3rd ed., pp. 66-95).
New York: The Guilford Press.
Stanovich, K. E. (1988). Explaining the differences between the dyslexic and the garden-variety poor
reader: The phonological-core variable-difference model.Journal of Learning Disabilities,
21(10), 590-604.

24. Bibliography
Allington, R. (2011). Best practices with Struggling Readers. In L. Morrow & L. B. Gambrell (Eds.), Best
Practices in Literacy Instruction (4th ed., pp. 96-116). New York, New York: The Guilford Press.
Linklater, D., O'Connor, R., & Palardy, G. (2009). Kindergarten literacy assessment of English Only and
English language learner students: An examination of the predictive validity of three phonemic
awareness measures. Journal of School Psychology, 47, 369-394.
Pomplum, M. (2004). The differential predictive validity of the initial skills analysis: Reading screening tests
for K-3. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(813)
Rupley, W. H., Blair, T. R., & Nichols, W. D. (2009). Effective reading instruction for struggling readers: The
role of direct/explicit teaching. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming LEarning
Difficulties,
24(2), 125-138.
Rynolds, M., Wheldall, K., & Madelain, A. (2011). Early identification of young struggling readers:
Preliminary benchmarks for intervention for students in years one and two in schools in
South Wales. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 16(2), 127-143.
Valencia , S., & Buly, M. (2004). Behind the test scores: What struggling readers really need. The Reading
Teacher, 6(6), 520-531