Elaine You raise some very good points here. I teach Diagnosis of Reading Problems part time at a local university as well as work as a reading specialist in my elementary school. I always say to my principal and to my graduate students that it is crucial that we know who is "setting the bar" for criterion referenced assessments and know how the bar was set. I tell teachers to try to triangulate all assessment measures before making major decisions. I look at different passages, different types of texts and include qualitative classroom observations before I make any judgments. If we are aware of the weaknesses of any assessment and interpret results accurately in light of everything else we know about the child, I think that fluency ranges can be useful. Note, that I am not a classroom teacher timing every student. I do believe that may send a different message...As a reading specialist, I am a diagnostician, trying to find out what can be done instructionally to help a student. I need to give some thought about whether or not I am sending my students a message by timing them. I keep the stopwatch in my lap and most often kids don't even know I am timing them. I don't generally have kids racing through to "read fast", but I will have to do some more observation here. Definitely food for thought... Say I have a student who is struggling with content area reading. I give three IRI passages, and this student can read the two narrative pieces at an instructional level, but struggles with the expository piece. I time all three passages, and note that this student doesn't slow down his reading rate to comprehend the expository piece. While perhaps this child lacked background knowledge or knowledge of expository text structure which impacted comprehension or vocabulary knowledge, I would also investigate whether or not this child knows how to adjust reading rate and how to become more aware when meaning breaks down. Diagnosis is often a process of elimination and while failing to adjust reading rates for difficult text is only one possible reason for this child's problems, I am not sure I would notice this subtlety by just doing a qualitative evaluation of the child's oral or silent reading. I totally understand and respect your concerns here. I have found reading rates useful when planning instruction but they are but one tool I use. Perhaps we need to consider the context in which rates are used? Please understand that I post these comments out of great respect for the high level of knowledge of research you have. I just have not seen the problems you describe in my setting. I will keep my eyes open though...I certainly want what is best for my kids. Jennifer Maryland In a message dated 7/8/2007 7:48:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Doesn't this render the idea of wpm even more arbitrary than the fact that it is set out there like it is some inviable truth. Isn't that what standardized tests of all sorts generally do? Take arbitrary facts, determine they are necessary knowledge and treat them as such even though they are decided by fallible humans with their own biases?. And who is to set the rate of how many wpm is acceptable for all kids (or the range of those wpm)--? See what I mean? ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. _______________________________________________ Mosaic mailing list Mosaic@literacyworkshop.org To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org. Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive.
