Our thinking in imposing limits revolves round several issues. One has to do with faulty towers and the fact that while many teachers became caught up in some fervor to raise the scores high, the notion of going broad and teaching deeply was falling to wayside. We also wanted students exposed to more opportunities for written response to literature before encountering levels 28 and above. Our writing skills are weak and the notion that a grade level reader can both read, comprehend and express that understanding in writing seemed worthy. Our cap for second grade is level 30. We want high quality written responses--I am not talking conventionally speaking, but in terms of ideas and understanding. Since so many of our kids read well below grade level, capping puts the spotlight on meeting a benchmark.
Another reason is that, for our older kids, DRA scores were showing no real alignment with other measures. A child proficient according to the old DRA (new version adopted this year) might be considered below basic by two other measures. We are stuck with the standardized test required by the state and, to be honest, I rather like the computer assessment used because it gives immediate and meaningful results to teachers willing to use them. Something seems fishy when a proficient DRA kiddo is a below basic kiddo across the board with the two other measures. We are finding more alignment with the new version. High performance at the levels requiring written response is typically being mirror in other measures. I am speaking here of score which might be (in order DRA, computer assessment, high stakes big ugly) advanced, advanced, proficient or basic, proficient, basic. We don't expect perfect alignment, but if these measures are valid it would seem reasonable to expect a bit closer alignment. One last issue as a coach, just because a kid CAN read at a given level does not mean they SHOULD. I had an interesting conversation with a new teacher last year (alternative certificate, green as green can be but what a doll--became one of our best) when one of her kids had checked out Are You There God, It's Me Margaret from the schools aging library. Teacher had never read the book and it seems a perfect example. Yes, child could read the book but lacked the schema (thankfully, at 7) to understand it and what teacher of a 7 year old wants to explain menstruation to a student??? Also, as the grown up version of this seven year old, there came a point in my life when I was resentful of all the wonderful literature I missed while being pushed to read more and more 'grown-up reading'. I became keenly aware of this as my sisters started bringing home childhood classics I had missed along the way. I guess it is far more support for the notion that being widely read, even at seven, is about more than difficulty of text. There are books that may be 'easy' (IMO), but shouldn't be missed! And a beach book or two never killed anyone. All that said, it is not like instruction is being capped. There are other means of knowing reading levels and we are working to make sure our teachers are all comfortable with ongoing assessment and decision-making. We are making changes to our collection tool (which is computer-based) that will allow teachers to report both the assessment level and sub scores of the DRA2 but the student's current performance levels. On 5/22/08 11:06 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: the problem (well, probably not a problem to some) with > that is: more than half of my class (this year) can decode beyond level L /M > and most can respond appropriately using comprehension strategies with some > degree of flexibility. The sea of talk with this particular group is not > forced... they are deep thinkers... > > > > **************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with > Tyler Florence" on AOL Food. > (http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4&?NCID=aolfod00030000000002) > _______________________________________________ > Mosaic mailing list > [email protected] > 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. > -- Lori Jackson District Literacy Coach & Mentor Todd County School District Box 87 Mission SD 57555 http:www.tcsdk12.org ph. 605.856.2211 Literacies for All Summer Institute July 17-20. 2008 Tucson, Arizona _______________________________________________ Mosaic mailing list [email protected] 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.
