234237320 running-record-case-study
- 1. Homework Help https://www.homeworkping.com/ Research Paper help https://www.homeworkping.com/ Online Tutoring https://www.homeworkping.com/ Running Record Case Study Victoria Schwandt EDU 3210 Dr. Miller 10/29/13 1
- 2. Introduction Prior to learning about the Oral Running Record and its purpose, the idea of assessment as a form of inquiry was a foreign concept to me. More often than not, assessments are associated with the “end results” of what a student has learned by the end of a particular unit or lesson in the classroom. The idea of continually performing a formative assessment on an individual child to monitor their reading ability was an entirely new to me. After much thought, I attributed this notion to the fact that I had never experienced this type of assessment when I was an elementary school student, nor had I ever witnessed any type of one-on-one attention with reading instruction while working in a classroom unless if it was a student who was struggling. Because of the stereotype that had been planted in my head that only assessment was used at the end of a unit and individual reading instruction was meant only for struggling students, I decided to perform my first Oral Running Record on my neighbor, Felix. Felix is an 8-year-old boy who according to his age should be in the 3rd grade if he attended public school. However, Felix’s parents decided to begin homeschooling this year due to their busy schedules as university professors. One of the main reasons why I chose Felix is because from an outsider 2
- 3. point-of-view, Felix has been given the tools necessary to read high levels of literacy and success that have been mentioned in both Dr. Miller’s lecture and in the textbook. For example, because of his parents’ academic status, the concepts of reading and writing are continuously being modeled in front of him. In addition, as Felix’s former German tutor, I have seen the abundance of literature that Felix and his older sister are immersed in. Felix comes from a home where there is an absence of a television or video games, which is a factor that influences and distracts many students his age from becoming lifelong readers. The purpose, however, of selecting Felix for the Oral Running Record was not because I thought he would perform outstandingly or satisfy my curiosity about the abilities of home school students versus public education students, but was to confirm the notion that Oral Running Records are beneficial for students of all learning types. As a future classroom teacher, Felix is the type of student who I believe could easily be overlooked because he receives good grades and demonstrates an interest in his own learning. I can see where it would be easy for a classroom teacher to give the majority of their time and extra effort to those students who display an obvious need for reading skills, while being unaware of the needs of higher-achieving students. When beginning the Oral Running Record with Felix, I let him select from a pile of books that I had taken from the elementary school that the Title I reading specialist informed me were 3rd , 4th and 5th grade level reading books. Felix, being very interested in science and social studies, chose a short informational text called All Kinds of Bridges by Isabella Jose. This text is from the Momentum Literacy 3
- 4. Program Step 3, Level B, (DRA 24-28) which is designated for the 4th grade. The text is 15 short pages about different types of bridges, how and why they are built with many accompanying color photographs. RESULTS After performing the Oral Running Record with Felix, I was actually very surprised at the results of the assessment. First and foremost, I had prepared myself with numerous levels of text because I had the preconceived notion that it would be difficult to actually present a challenging text to Felix that was not multiple grade levels ahead of him. The results were surprising in the sense that he actually did make quite a few errors, and these are the types of errors that need to be corrected at this age in order to combat any poor reading habits that will follow him throughout this educational career. When categorizing the errors and self-corrections that were made, it was apparent that the evidence produced from the Oral Running Record had significant meaning. Because I was so surprised at the results of the assessment, I quickly had Felix read a page of another text of similar level to confirm that it was not the type of text that was read, yet the actual words that had given him difficulty. I was concerned that because he chose a non-fiction informational text, that there may have been too many words not familiar in everyday vocabulary that would alter his results. However, the second text I had him read, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory by Roald Dahl presented him with the same struggles, with seemingly more 4
- 5. common words. The results of Felix’s Oral Running Record demonstrate that he is at level 3 in terms of fluency. This means that Felix reads using a mixture of word-by word reading using fluent, phrased reading with expressive interpretation. Despite the evidence of attention to punctuation and syntax, reading for comprehension and problem solving is definitely present. The initial text that was given to Felix, All Kinds of Bridges, contained a total of 352 words. Out of 352 words, Felix made 30 errors which when calculated gives him an accuracy rate of 91%. This score falls under the category of Instructional Text. In addition to the 30 errors, Felix made 7 self-corrections giving him a 37:7 rate of self-corrections. The importance of these results is that because this text is at the Instructional level, it shows that Felix is at the Zone of Proximal Development. This means that with proper scaffolding and instruction, Felix will be able to obtain the next level of learning by having the proper foundation that is needed to obtain and retain new information. In addition, it can be determined that this level of 4th grade text is not too easy, yet is not challenging to the point of frustration. As a parent or a teacher, this is very valuable information in terms of selecting appropriate text and developing personalized and meaningful instruction for Felix. STRENGTHS The purpose of the running record is to indicate a child’s strategies during their reading. To interpret their errors, we use the cues M (meaning), S (syntax) and V (visual) to determine what influenced the child’s error when reading. From the 5
- 6. running record, we can also determine what a child’s strengths are, by taking note of the mistakes they did not make. What I found very impressive through the results of Felix’s Oral Running Record was his ability to make his own self-corrections and trudge through the words that presented great difficulty to him. For example, never once did Felix take his eyes off the word or look in my direction for guidance or assistance. This skill alone demonstrates that Felix takes ownership for his own learning and has the determination to problem solve on his own. The fact that the conventions “Try It”, “Try That Again”, or “Told” are not present on his Individual Score Sheet. This observation alone is one that is very valuable, especially to parents who hopefully concerned with their child’s motivation and willingness to learn, which is often a painful struggle for many learners. In addition to reader motivation, Felix demonstrated strength in being able to self-correct errors by using context clues and syntax to indicate an error. For example, one line of the text reads, “A bridge is built strong enough to support its own weight...” (Jose, 5). When first reading this sentence, Felix read the word “strong” incorrectly and read it as “song”. However, he was able to self-monitor by realizing that the word “song” had nothing to do with bridges or weight and corrected himself before moving on to the next word. Another example of this was when Felix self corrected himself for the word “piers”. The sentence reads, “The girders rest on the piers or other supports that hold up the bridge” (Jose, 6). Felix read the word “piers” as “pears”. In this specific example, I took note of Felix saying “No wait, that’s not right” and reread the word 6
- 7. as “piers”. This example demonstrates “meaning” as a strategy for determining the correct word when reading. Although it is possible that this was the first time Felix had seen or heard of the word “piers”, it is likely that he knew the meaning of the word “pears” that he read initially. The fact that he was able to determine his error through his association of “pears” with “fruit” and its absence of relationship with “bridges”, he was able to correct himself by rereading. In addition to self-correction, Felix demonstrated the ability to read with emphasis, expression and intonation. When reading, Felix was able to read smoothly, at almost the same speed you would use when talking. As a listener, it made it much easier for me to following the meaning of the words being read. As opposed to other readers, Felix did not have to put a great deal of effort into decoding words and most sentences were read fluidly, which I would attribute to his accuracy with sight words and high frequency words such as “the, that, or, on, of etc.” which are words that often connect details together. WEAKNESSES Although I would say that Felix is on target for his age and grade level as a reader, the Oral Running Record demonstrated many areas that require attention in order to ensure literacy success in the future. When determining which type of thinking determined his errors, the majority of errors were motivated by visual cues. This means that when Felix was reading, he would use visual information from the print to influence his errors. When Felix would read a word incorrectly, the word that he would substitute 7
- 8. for the correct word would most often begin with the same letter as the correct word, and contain many of the same letters. For example, the word “ravines” was read as “raves”. Both of these words begin with “rav” and end with “s”. Taking into consideration Felix’s ability to read with speed and intonation, I would attribute this weakness to his desire to finish the text as quickly as possible. This presents a problem for Felix has he grows older and is faced with more complicated texts because this weakness will prevent him from truly comprehending the purpose of the text and constructing meaning from the text as well. My hypothesis that Felix is overly concerned with being an efficient and quick reader parallels his other errors, which were primarily omissions. Felix has an apparent habit of skipping over words that do not seem to be of great significance. Often, when Felix would read it would be similar to reading notes that a college student when listening to a professor lecture. The main points were recorded, yet the words deemed “unnecessary” for retaining the main idea were omitted. For example, a sentence in the text reads, “Some bridges are made of wood, and some bridges are made of steel” (Jose, 3). When reading this sentence, Felix completely ignored the first word of the sentence, which is “some”. Although the word “some” is not incredibly important in this context, there are many instances where this would not be the case. In other instances, Felix would omit similar words such as “the”, “of” and “a”. In terms of reading for accuracy, this is one of Felix’s weaknesses that must be addressed. Another concept that presented difficulty for Felix was the recognition for certain blends. For example, the word “girder”, which is a type of bridge, appeared 8
- 9. many times in the text. Almost every time, Felix would read the word as “grider”. Felix was able to recognize the onset as the letter “g”, but switched the “r” and “i” sounds, which ultimately altered the spelling and pronunciation. I would assume that this was the first time that Felix encountered the word “girder”, based on the fact that it was the first time I had encountered it as well. However, the fact remains the same that the individual phonemes were incorrectly spoken and incorrectly ordered when reading aloud. FOLLOW UP LESSON If I were Felix’s classroom teacher, I would address the skills that need improvement by utilizing two different strategies. The first strategy would be the Multi-Letter Chunk Strategy. I believe that Felix would benefit by learning the different ways to break apart words using this strategy because it can be used not only at his current reading level, but also for the rest of his life. The Multi-Letter Chunk Strategy breaks down words by using prefixes, suffixes, base words, Greek and Latin origins compound words, contractions and syllables. A lesson in Multi-Letter chunking for Felix would allow him to read similar texts as his classmates, but while improving more advanced skills for his current reading level. Felix would learn how to search for different chunks in a word which will reinforce the accuracy of reading each individual letter and chunk of a word, but also by encouraging higher-order thinking skills. Not only would Felix be able to read long and complex new words, but learn strategies for determining their meaning, which can be applied to other content areas. 9
- 10. Being aware of Felix’s personal interests and prior-knowledge, learning how to search for base words and Greek and Latin origins would be very engaging and advantageous for Felix. Considering that Felix is fascinated with science and social studies, he is going to encounter many words with these origins that will have significant meaning to the text he is reading. The purpose of this will not only teach Felix how to sound out words slowly and accurately, but to reinforce comprehension and retain the purpose of the text. The second follow up lesson I would give Felix would be a Language Experience Activity. Although this type of activity is normally used for ELL students or students with special needs, I think it would be incredibly helpful for Felix. Having conversed with Felix many times, I am aware that Felix reads very similarly to how he speaks. Just as Felix would omit words he did not feel were important in the reading, when Felix is sharing his thoughts, he speaks without using words to connect his thoughts. I believe this would be a great activity for him to do with myself or even another student. By copying down his own dictation and then having him read his own words, he would be use his good self-correction skills to identify the importance of transitional and high frequency words. REFLECTION Not only was the Oral Reading Record assignment beneficial in terms of analyzing Felix’s reading skills and fluency, it was an incredible assessment for myself in terms of my own thinking. Walking into this assignment, I had my own set of personal biases about assessments, stereotypes and students that ultimately were 10
- 11. proved wrong—and for my own benefit. Just as this was a first time experience for Felix, it was for me as well. This experience was invaluable because it taught me that as a future classroom teacher, every child is an individual and has their own set of strengths, weaknesses and experiences. Factors such as family, background, standardized test scores of social interactions should always be noted, but should not be the sole factors that drive instruction. Prior to the Oral Reading Record, I would have let my prior judgments about Felix, his family and his background influence what I thought his reading level or abilities were. Clearly, through this one-on-one assessment, there are of course many strengths Felix exhibited, but some lacking skills that as a classroom teacher, I would need to address. One thing that I believe contributed to the authenticity of this assessment is that when I explained to Felix what I was doing, I emphasized the fact that I was learning too. I did not want Felix to feel nervous or stressed out about being perfect or feeling that I would be judging him. I asked him before we read to be patient with me because this was the first running record for me as well. Prior to the actual recording of Felix’s reading, I let him show me some of his favorite books and we had a conversation about what he was currently learning about in other subjects, that way the transition into the assessment was very comfortable. Although this will not be the case when I have my own classroom, I believe that for this particular situation, it helped both Felix and myself to be at ease. The next time I conduct an oral reading record, I will be sure to have a clipboard so that the student I am assessing does not get distracted at the marks 11
- 12. that I am making on the score sheet. I made this mistake for the first few lines that Felix read and could feel his eyes glance at the paper until I propped the score sheet onto a book in my lap so he could not see the marks I was making. However, Felix being the curious student he is, wanted to see his errors when he was finished. As an educator, this meant a lot that he was interested in his own learning and it also reassured me that my assessment and opinion held some weight in his mind. CONCLUSION The Oral Reading Record assignment proved to be a beneficial tool to learn not only as a means of formative assessment, but also as a resource for determining meaningful and appropriate literacy instruction for students. Not only does the reading record serve as an indicator for skills and thinking that need to be improved, but they are also evidence for important reading milestones that are reached and a means for celebrating student success as they improve. 12
- 13. Bibliography Dahl, Roald. Charlie and the chocolate factory. New York: Puffin Books, 1988. Print. Graves, Bonnie B., and Michael F. Graves. Teaching Reading in the 21st Century: Motivating All Learners. Boston: Pearson, 2011. Print. Jose, Isabella. All Kinds of Bridges. St. Kilda: BrownBarrie, 1998. Print. "Momentum Library : Classroom Books | Scholastic." Momentum Library : Classroom Books | Scholastic. Scholastic, 2013. Web. 29 Oct. 2013. 13
- 14. 14