Enthusiastic Enigmatic ELA Educators: The Assessment Results

Reading

Reading Responses:

In September our 3rd Grade students went through their first round of reading and responding to informational text comparative assessments using pencil/paper and then technology. We used Teachers College Columbia University Reading and Writing Project's Common Core Aligned Performance Assessments. We repeated them in January and June to gage their progress. Check out the results!

Fall Assessment

R.3.1	1: Novice	2: Developing	3: Effective	4: Highly Effective
Ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as a basis for the answers.	Attempts to answer questions about the text, but does not include specific details or examples from the provided text(s). Indicates misunderstanding of the provided text(s) or a completely personal, rather than text-based, response.	Refers to at least one detail or example from the provided sources. Demonstrates some understanding of the text, though some of the responses are inaccurate or not text-based.	Refers to more than one detail or example from the provided sources. Most references are relevant. Demonstrates an accurate understanding of the text.	Refers to multiple relevant details or examples from the provided sources. References to source material demonstrate an understanding of literal and inferential details from the text.
Pencil/Paper	5	16	4	1
Technology	Did not do at this stage

Lessons Learned:

Most students scored higher using pencil/paper in September, but we acknowledge that this is their first experience on Chromebooks and with formal keyboarding training. One positive outcome from using the 1:1 Chromebooks is the enjoyment and perseverance. According to STAR Reading assessments 42% of our students are considered below benchmark. Our reluctant readers and writers have demonstrated an unprecedented level of engagement not only on the computer, but also reading and responding using pencil/paper. Their STAR Assessment results progress monitors have also increased significantly. They have embraced the model we are using of graphic organizers and integrating technology through Schoology while responding to text.

Winter Assessment

R.3.1	0: Did not complete	1: Novice	2: Developing	3: Effective	4: Highly Effective
Ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as a basis for the answers.		Attempts to answer questions about the text, but does not include specific details or examples from the provided text(s). Indicates misunderstanding of the provided text(s) or a completely personal, rather than text-based, response.	Refers to at least one detail or example from the provided sources. Demonstrates some understanding of the text, though some of the responses are inaccurate or not text-based.	Refers to more than one detail or example from the provided sources. Most references are relevant. Demonstrates an accurate understanding of the text.	Refers to multiple relevant details or examples from the provided sources. References to source material demonstrate an understanding of literal and inferential details from the text.
Pencil/Paper	3	1	5	9	8
Technology	0	1	3	14	8

Lessons Learned:

We went from having 5 proficient to 17 using pencil/paper and they 22 using technology! (Three students were absent, but of those three looking at other work samples they probably would have fell into the 3 range.) That was a huge jump! Instead of having 21 students to grow, now we have 6 students. Whew! Much more manageable. The other exciting piece is that we added technology as way to respond through Schoology and we saw more proficiency with this way to respond than pencil paper. They wrote more details when using technology and....This tended to be our reluctant writers! According to our STAR Reading Assessments, 12% of our students are below benchmark. That is a 30% improvement. Time to celebrate!

Spring Assessment

R.3.1	0: Did not complete	1: Novice	2: Developing	3: Effective	4: Highly Effective
Ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as a basis for the answers.		Attempts to answer questions about the text, but does not include specific details or examples from the provided text(s). Indicates misunderstanding of the provided text(s) or a completely personal, rather than text-based, response.	Refers to at least one detail or example from the provided sources. Demonstrates some understanding of the text, though some of the responses are inaccurate or not text-based.	Refers to more than one detail or example from the provided sources. Most references are relevant. Demonstrates an accurate understanding of the text.	Refers to multiple relevant details or examples from the provided sources. References to source material demonstrate an understanding of literal and inferential details from the text.
Pencil/Paper	0	0	5	18	8
Technology	0	0	2	9	14

Lessons Learned:

So excited to see no one in the 1 range. Disappointed to see 5 students in the 2 range for pencil paper. We anticipated two students being there. The other three misunderstood parts of the passage. I am wondering about our seating arrangement at that time and if they were turn and talk partners. Something to investigate. We are were thrilled to have doubled our “Effective” writers using pencil/paper and flip flopped our “Effective” and “Highly Effective” writers. Having 23 proficient writers is a great feeling. It validates that integrating technology was the correct strategy for us. Our STAR Assessments showed 19% of our students are below benchmark. We used Fountas & Pinnell running records as another measures to show growth. All but two students were within the grade level perimeters. Those two students are currently on IEPs.

Writing:

Position/Structure/Elaboration

A variety of Fall writing samples of our varying of abilities.