Archive

Posts Tagged ‘diagnostic spelling assessment’

The Problem with Words Their Way

Alternatives to Words Their Way

The Problem with Words Their Way

Back in the late 1990s, I served as an elementary reading specialist in a large Northern California school district. Our cadre of 21 reading specialists were in-serviced on new word study program, Words Their Way. Dr. Shane Templeton, one of the authors, trained us for four days. Two of Dr. Templeton’s training components, the Qualitative Spelling Inventory (developed by colleague and fellow author, Dr. Donald Bear) and the developmental patterns of spelling, were novel approaches to word study. By the end of the fourth day, we reading specialists had bought in hook, line, and sinker to the Words Their Way program. Our 50,000-student district adopted the Qualitative Spelling Inventory as our K−6 diagnostic spelling assessment, and teachers used the test results to both place students in reading programs and differentiate instruction within the classroom.

The elementary school to which I was assigned was over 1,000 students and drew from lower to middle income, ethnically and language diverse neighborhoods. Our supportive principal purchased each staff member a copy of Words Their Way, I was allotted 10 two-hour staff developments, and we dug into teaching the program to our students.

By the end of two years, here’s what we teachers found: The Qualitative Spelling Inventory was a reliable placement assessment, alongside of our phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and writing sample assessments. Certainly, spelling ability is one key indicator of reading ability as recent studies have demonstrated (Adams, 2011; Gentry & Graham, 2010; Moats, 2005; Reed, 2012). However, the assessment gave only general information as to which developmental spelling stages matched our students’ spelling mastery. Diagnostic assessments, based upon random samples, which produce only general student data are problematic for teachers in the trenches. Teachers want comprehensive diagnostic assessments which pinpoint specific deficits. In other words, teachers want data to teach to. The Qualitative Spelling Inventory narrowed down the deficits, but was rather useless, according to my elementary school teachers, beyond its use as a placement tool. Teachers asked the legitimate question: Why can’t our placement assessments be teachable?

I took it upon myself to deliver what the teachers were asking for: a comprehensive diagnostic spelling assessment which would give teachers the tool to drive their instruction. Of course, the spelling assessment could not be the same for each grade level, but would add on additional spelling patterns appropriate to each grade level. My reading specialist colleagues and elementary staff were gracious and demanding in their revision suggestions. My Diagnostic Spelling Assessment in its five grade level iterations: Grades 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 cover all K−3 spelling patterns as well as the grade-level additions. I also created an audio version of the assessment to make life easier for teachers (especially for make-ups and for new students). Yes, both written and audio versions and a progress-monitoring matrix are available in the FREE download at the end of this article.

After the first year of training and implementation of Words Their Way in my elementary school, only half of the teachers decided to continue the program for the next school year. By the end of the second year, only a handful continued use of the program. Why so?

  1. The program requires inordinate amounts of teacher prep and class time to implement with fidelity.
  2. The results from both standardized tests and teacher observations did not see the expected spelling improvement (nor reading and vocabulary improvement). That improvement did come two years later with the district’s adoption of the Open Court phonics program, albeit without a district-wide adoption of a spelling curriculum.
  3. Teachers began to see the Words Their Way word sorts as only one means of spelling practice and wanted to use other spelling instructional strategies. Notice that the program was not titled Spelling Their Way. Additionally, primary teachers, especially, questioned the accuracy the development stages. Their students and their spelling-reading instruction did not perfectly conform to and match each neatly described spelling stage. Intermediate and upper grades teachers found The Derivational Relations Stage to be an unwieldy creature to teach and did not see the pay-off for investing so much prep and instructional time in the program. As usual, teachers can be quite prescient when evaluating the application of theory into practice. Twenty years later, noted spelling researcher, J. Richard Gentry, PHD, echoed their concerns in his article, “Why America Can’t Read,”

Words Their Way is a guidebook for studying words; it is not a spelling curriculum. The original preface describes it purpose:  “…Ordered in this developmental format, Words Their Way complements the use of any existing phonics, spelling, and vocabulary curricula.

Dr. Gentry cites what he views to be the theoretical flaw in the Words Their Way program:

In Chapter 1 of Words Their Way (2016 edition) we learn the theoretical basis for this method of word study: “Developmental spelling researchers have examined the three layers of English orthography in relation to developmental progressions from alphabet to pattern to meaning.” (Bear, et al, 2000, p.5.) As a developmental spelling researcher, I beg to disagree. There is no developmental progression in the child’s brain when constructing word knowledge that proceeds over time from alphabet to pattern to meaning. Word knowledge of alphabet, pattern, and meaning are being constructed at every stage of spelling development (Gentry, 2000).

More importantly, spelling development does not continue to develop in phases or stages beyond a ceiling which usually happens near the end of first grade if kids are developmentally on track. I pointed this out in The Reading Teacher in a refereed journal article about sixteen years ago (Gentry, 2000).

Let me be specific. There is no developmental stage for Ages 10+ in Grades 5 to 12 called “The Derivational Relations Stage” as claimed in all editions of WTW. In fact, as spelling researcher Louisa Moats points out, Derivational Relations begins in first grade: Words in a first grade spelling curriculum are Anglo-Saxon regular consonant and vowel phone-grapheme correspondences along with words such as goatwifemotherlove, and house. They all have an alphabet layer, an Anglo-Saxon pattern, and a meaning layer. In fact, derivational constancy is so dominant in English at early levels that the 100 most frequently used words in English—the ones teachers should teach in first grade—can all be traced back to Anglo-Saxon origins. This debunks Word’s Their Way’s “alphabet, pattern, and meaning” stage theory which suggests that clusters of error types develop later in brain development.

Years later, I developed five grade-level spelling programs (4, 5, 6, 7, and 8) to teach commonly acknowledged grade-level spelling patterns, using spelling sorts based upon specific spelling

Differentiated Spelling Instruction Grades 4-8

Differentiated Spelling Instruction

patterns, for example, the /ion/ sound-spelling patterns. No prep. Pretest, spelling sort, post test. Done. Check out my Differentiated Spelling Instruction programs or my Spelling Literacy Centers.

Plus, I included targeted, remedial spelling pattern worksheets to correspond to each grade-level Diagnostic Spelling Assessment. Each worksheet explains the spelling pattern, provides examples, includes a spelling sort, has a word jumble, rhyme, and/or book search, and includes a short formative assessment to determine whether or not the student has mastered the spelling pattern. For example, the grade 4 program includes all K−3 spelling patterns, the grade 5 program includes all all K−4 spelling patterns, etc.

Get the Diagnostic Spelling Assessment, Mastery Matrix, and Sample Lessons FREE Resource:

Literacy Centers, Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary, Writing , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

ELA and Reading Assessments Do’s and Don’ts #4

ELA and Reading Assessment Do's and Don'ts

Assessment Do’s and Don’ts

I’ve been using a silly movie theme to weave together a series of articles for my Do’s and Don’ts of ELA and Reading Assessments series. So far I’ve offered these suggestions over the trailer and first three episodes:

    1. Episode 1
  • Do use comprehensive assessments, not random samples. 
  • DON’T assess to assess. Assessment is not the end goal. 
  • DO use diagnostic assessments. 
  • DON’T assess what you won’t teach.” 
    1. Episode 2
  • DO analyze data with others (drop your defenses). 
  • DON’T assess what you can’t teach. 
  • DO steal from others. 
  • DON’T assess what you must confess (data is dangerous).
    1. Episode 3
  • DO analyze data both data deficits and mastery.
  • DON’T assess what you haven’t taught.
  • DO use instructional resources with embedded assessments.
  • DON’T use instructional resources which don’t teach to data.

Permit me to tell a brief anecdote. As a junior in high school, I got my license on my sixteenth birthday. At last, I could take my girlfriend out on a real date! Where to go? The movies, of course. Just one problem.

Friday night was guys’ night. My group of buddies and I always got together on Friday night. When Richard called me up after school to tell me that he would pick me up at 7:00, I quickly lied and told him that I was sick. Of course, I had already called my girlfriend to ask her to go to the movies.

We were munching on popcorn, half-way through the movie, when an obnoxiously loud group of guys entered the theater. Yes… my friends. I slumped down in my seat and told my girlfriend that I needed to see all the credits before leaving. When I assumed my friends had left the theater for their next Friday night adventure, my girlfriend and I slowly made our way up to the lobby.

Richard was the first friend to greet me. Let’s just say I paid dearly for that lie.

This article’s focus?

DO let diagnostic data do the talking. DON’T assume what students do and do not know. DO use objective data. DON’T trust teacher judgment alone.

The FREE assessment download at the end of this article includes a recording matrix and two great lessons… all to convince you to check out my assessment-based ELA and reading program resources at Pennington Publishing.

DO let diagnostic data do the talking.

One of the first lessons new teachers learn is how to answer this student or parent question: “Why did you give me (him or her) a ___ on this essay, test, project, etc.?”

Of course, every veteran teacher knows the proper response (with italics for speech emphasis): “I didn’t give you (him or her) anything. You (he or she) earned it.

A less snotty and more effective response is to reference the data. Data is objective. Changing the subjective nature of the question into an objective answer is a good teacher self-defense mechanism and gets to the heart of the issue.

Diagnostic data is especially helpful in answering why students are having difficulties in a class. Additionally, the data in and of itself offers a prescription for treatment. Going home from the doctor with a “This should go away by itself in a few weeks” or a “Just not sure what the problem is, but it doesn’t seem too serious” is frustrating. Patients want a prescription to fix the issue. Parents and students can get that prescription with assessment-based instructional resources.

One other application for both new and veteran teachers to note: A teacher approaches her principal with this request: “I need $$$$ to purchase Pennington Publishing’s Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary BUNDLE. Our program adoption does not provide the resources I need to teach the CCSS standards.”

Answer: “Not at this time.”

Instead, let diagnostic data do the talking.

“Look at the diagnostic data on this matrix for my students. They need the resources to teach to these deficits.”

Answer: “Yes (or Maybe)”

DON’T assume what students do and do not know. 

We teachers are certainly not free of presuppositions and bias. As a result, we assume what has yet to be proven. In other words, we beg the question regarding what our students know and don’t know.

He must be smart, but just lazy. His older sister was one of my best students. They’re in an honors class; of course they know their parts of speech. I have to teach everything as if none of my students knows anything; I assume they are all tabula rasa (blank slates). You all had Ms. Peters last year, so we don’t have to teach you the structure of an argumentative essay.

Effective diagnostic assessments eliminates the assumptions. Regarding diagnostic assessments, I always advise teachers: “If they know it, they can show it; if they don’t, they won’t.”

DO use objective data.

Not all diagnostic assessments are created equally. By design, a random sample assessment is subjective, no matter the form of sampling. Those of you who remember your college statistics class will agree.

Teachers need objective data, not data which suggests problem areas. Teachers need to know the specifics to be able to inform their instruction. For this application, objective means comprehensive.

The “objective” PAARC, SWBAC, or state-constructed CCSS tests may indicate relative student weaknesses in mechanics; however, teachers want to know exactly which comma rules have and have not been mastered. Teachers need that form of objective data.

DON’T trust teacher judgment alone.

After years of teaching, veteran teachers learn to rely on their judgment (as they should). After a few more years of teaching, good teachers learn to distrust their own judgment at points. Experienced teachers look for the counter-intuitive in these complex subjects of study that we call students. What makes them tick? Kids keep our business interesting.

Diagnostic and formative assessments bring out our own errors in judgment and help us experiment to find solutions for what our students need to succeed. Assessments point out discrepancies and point to alternative means of instruction.

For example, a student may score high in reading comprehension on an un-timed standards-based assessment. Also, she was in Ms. McGuire’s highest reading group last year. Most teachers would assume that she has no reading problems and should be assigned to an advanced literacy group.

Yet, her diagnostic spelling assessment demonstrates plenty of gaps in spelling patterns. A wise teacher would suspend her initial judgment and do a bit more digging. If that teacher gave the Vowel Sounds Phonics Assessment (our FREE download at the end of this article), the student might demonstrate some relative weaknesses. She may be an excellent sight-word reader, who does fine with stories, but one whom will fall apart reading an expository article or her science textbook.

Like my dad always told me… Measure twice and cut once.

Thanks for watching Episode 4. Make sure to buy your ticket for the next installment of ELA and Reading Assessments Do’s and Don’ts: Episode 5 before you sneak out of the theater with your girlfriend or boyfriend. Also get more 15 FREE ELA and reading assessments, corresponding recording matrices, administrative audio files, and ready-to-teach lessons. A 94% score on Rotten Tomatoes! Here’s the preview: DO treat assessment  as instruction. DON’T trust all assessment results. DO make students and parents your assessment partners. Don’t go beyond the scope of your assessments.

*****

I’m Mark Pennington, ELA teacher and reading specialist. Check out my assessment-based ELA and reading intervention resources at Pennington Publishing.

Get the Vowel Sounds Phonics Assessment with Audio File and Matrix FREE Resource:

Grammar/Mechanics, Literacy Centers, Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary, Writing , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

ELA and Reading Assessments Do’s and Don’ts #3

ELA and Reading Assessments Do's and Don'ts

Do’s and Don’ts: ELA and Reading Assessments

The thing about movie sequels is that we feel a compulsive necessity to see the next and the next because we’ve seen the first. I’d be interested to know what percentage of movie-goers, who saw all three Lord of the Rings movies, watched both Hobbit prequels. My guess would be a rather high percentage.

If my theory is correct, I’d also hazard to guess that the critic reviews would not substantially alter that percentage.

Of course my hope is that I’ve hooked you on this article series and the FREE downloads 🙂 of assessments, recording matrices, audio files, and activities in order to entice you to check out my corresponding assessment-based products at Pennington Publishing.

In my Do’s and Don’ts of ELA and Reading Assessments series, I’ve offered these bits of advice so far:

    1. Episode 1
  • Do use comprehensive assessments, not random samples. 
  • DON’T assess to assess. Assessment is not the end goal. 
  • DO use diagnostic assessments. 
  • DON’T assess what you won’t teach.” 
    1. Episode 2
  • DO analyze data with others (drop your defenses). 
  • DON’T assess what you can’t teach. 
  • DO steal from others. 
  • DON’T assess what you must confess (data is dangerous).

DO analyze data both data deficits and mastery.

Students are like fixer-upper houses.

Kids are fixer-uppers, waiting to be fixed and flipped.

Teachers are fixers. In some sense we view our students as “as is” houses or fixer-uppers, waiting for us to determine what needs repair and updating so that we can flip them in market-ready condition to the next teacher.

Teachers should use diagnostic assessments in this way. Most all students need to catch up while they keep up with grade-level instruction.

However, we miss some of the value of diagnostic assessments when we don’t analyze data to build upon the strengths of individual students. For example, teachers are frequently concerned about the student who has high reading fluency rates, but poor comprehension. Yes, some students are able to read quickly with minimal miscues, but understand and retain little of what they have read. Just weird, right?

Looking only at the diagnostic deficit (lack of comprehension) might lead the teacher to assume that the student is a sight word reader in need of extensive decoding practice to shore up this reading foundation. However, if we look at the relative strength (fluency), we might prescribe a different treatment to build upon that strength. It may certainly be true that the student might have some decoding deficits, but if the student is able to recognize the words, it makes sense to use that ability to teach the student how to internally monitor text with self-questioning strategies.

Both relative strengths and weaknesses matter when analyzing student assessment data.

DON’T assess what you haven’t taught.

Teachers love to see progress in their students. Our profession enables us to see a student go from A to B throughout the year with us as the relevant variable. Assessment data does provide us with extrinsic rewards and a self-pat-on-the-back. I love our profession!

But we have to use real data to achieve that self-satisfaction. Otherwise, we are only fooling ourselves. As the new school year begins, countless teachers will administer entry baseline assessments, designed to demonstrate student ignorance. These assessments test what students should know by the end of the year, not what they are expected to know at the beginning of the year. Often the same assessment is administered at the end of the year to determine summative progress and assess a teacher’s program effectiveness.

Resist the temptation to artificially produce a feel-good assessment program such as that. Such a baseline test affords no diagnostic data; it does not inform your instruction. It makes students feel stupid and wastes class time. The year-end summative assessment is too far removed from the baseline to measure the effects of the the variables (teacher and program) upon achievement with any degree of accuracy.

Test only what has been taught to see what they’ve retained and forgotten.

DO use instructional resources with embedded assessments.

In my work as an ELA teacher and reading specialist at the elementary, middle school, high school, and community college levels, I’ve found that most teachers use three types of assessments: 1. They give a few entry-level assessments, but do little if any thing with the data. 2. They give unit tests once a month, but do not re-teach or re-test. 3. They give some form of end-of-year or term summative test (the final) with little or no review or re-teaching of the test results.

As you, no doubt, can tell, I don’t see the value in any of the above approaches to assessment. It’s not that these tests are useless; it’s that they tend to be reductive. Teachers give these instead of the tests they should be using to inform their instruction. Diagnostic assessments (as detailed in the previous section) are essential to plan and inform instruction. Also, what’s missing in their assessment plan? Formative assessments.

My take is that the best method of on-going formative assessment is with embedded assessments. I use embedded assessments to mean quick checks for understanding that are included in each lesson. Both the teacher and student need to know whether the skill or concept is understood following instruction, guided practice, and independent practice. For example, in the FREE diagnostic assessment (with audio file), recording matrix, and lessons download at the end of this article, the lesson samples from my Differentiated Spelling Instruction programs are spelling pattern worksheets. These are remedial worksheets which students would complete if the Diagnostic Spelling Assessment indicated specific spelling pattern deficits. Each worksheet includes a writing application at the end of the worksheet, which demonstrates whether the student has or has not mastered the practiced spelling pattern. These are embedded assessments, which the teacher can use to determine if additional instruction is unnecessary or required.

Use instructional materials which teach and test.

DON’T use instructional resources which don’t teach to data.

The converse of the previous section is also important to bullet point. To put things simply: Why would a teacher choose to use an instructional resource (a worksheet, a game, software, a lecture, a class discussion, an article, anything) which is not testable in some way? Of course, the assessment need not include pencil and paper; informed teacher observation can certainly include assessment of learning.

Let’s use one example to demonstrate an instructional resource which does not teach to data and how that same resource can teach to data: independent reading. This one will step on a few toes.

Instructional Resource: “Everyone take out your independent reading books for Sustained Silent Reading (SSR).” Okay, you may do Drop Everything and Read (DEAR) or Free Voluntary Reading (FVR) or…

Practice:  20 minutes of silent reading

Assessment: None

The instructional resource may or may not be teaching. We don’t know. If the student is reading well at appropriate challenge level, the student is certainly benefiting from vocabulary acquisition. If the student is daydreaming or pretending to read, SSR is producing no instruction benefit. Following is an alternative use of this instructional resource:

Instructional Resource: “Everyone take out your challenge level independent reading books for Sustained Silent Reading (SSR), your

SCRIP Comprehension Bookmarks

SCRIP Comprehension Strategy Bookmarks

SCRIP Comprehension Strategies Bookmarks, and your pencil for annotations (margin notes).”

Practice with Assessment:  Read for 10 minutes, annotating the text. Then do a re-tell with your assigned partner for 1 minute, using the SCRIP Comprehension Strategies Bookmarks as self-questioning prompts. Partners are to complete the re-tell checklist. Repeat after 10 more minutes. Teacher randomly calls on a few readers to repeat their re-tells to the entire class and their partners’ additions. If the checklists and teacher observation of the oral re-tells indicate that the students are missing, say, causes-effect relationships in their reading, the teacher should prepare and present a think-aloud lesson, emphasizing this reading strategy with practice. This practice uses data and informs the teacher’s instruction. Plus, it provides students with a purpose for instruction and holds them accountable for learning.

Thanks for watching Episode 3. Make sure to purchase your ticket for the next installment of ELA and Reading Assessments Do’s and Don’ts: Episode 4 before you walk out of the theater. This episode will sell-out fast! Also get more 15 FREE ELA and reading assessments, corresponding recording matrices, administrative audio files, and ready-to-teach lessons. A 98% score on Rotten Tomatoes! Here’s the preview: DO let diagnostic data do the talking. DON’T assume what students do and do not know. DO use objective data. DON’T trust teacher judgment alone.

*****

I’m Mark Pennington, ELA teacher and reading specialist. Check out my assessment-based ELA and reading intervention resources at Pennington Publishing.

Get the Diagnostic Spelling Assessment, Mastery Matrix, and Sample Lessons FREE Resource:

Grammar/Mechanics, Literacy Centers, Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary, Writing , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Spelling Scope and Sequence

For many teachers, spelling instruction has taken a back seat to other instruction, especially in the ELA middle and high school classrooms. Perhaps this has been the case because of so many years in which spelling was relegated to an editing-only issue at the tail end of the writing process. Or perhaps this has been the case because of so many years in which spelling was considered as part to whole instruction rather than in the predominant whole to part instruction of whole language reading and constructivism. Or perhaps this has been the case because of so many years in which spelling was considered as the stepchild of vocabulary. Spelling workbooks, once a staple in both the elementary and secondary classrooms, were removed from supplemental program lists at district and state levels. However, things are changing. Educators who once thought that spelling word check would solve students’ spelling and writing issues are squarely facing the fact that they do have a responsibility to teach spelling patterns.

In fact, most all teachers support teaching some form of simple to complex instructional order in teaching spelling. For example, students need to be able to spell plurals for singular nouns with an ending prior to learning that nouns ending in /ch/, /sh/, /x/, /s/, or are spelled with “es” prior to learning nouns ending in /f/ are spelling with “ves” prior to learning about irregular plurals such as children and deer prior to learning about Latin plural spellings such as “” and “ae.” In other words, the simple academic language and grammatical instruction should precede the more complex. We have supportive (and recent–as of January 2016) educational research to validate this instructional order:

Here’s the research to support simple to complex instructional order…

In a January 2016 article, the American Psychological Association published a helpful article titled Practice for Knowledge Acquisition (Not Drill and Kill) in which researchers summarize how instructional practice should be ordered: “Deliberate practice involves attention, rehearsal and repetition and leads to new knowledge or skills that can later be developed into more complex knowledge and skills… (Campitelli & Gobet, 2011).”

Of course, spelling instruction (like grammar and usage instruction) is certainly recursive. Once the simple is taught to “mastery” and the complex is introduced, the simple is always re-taught and practiced in other instructional contexts. For example, teachers will need to teach and re-teach the before spelling rule yearly from third grade through high school.

The Common Core Standards present a simple to complex instructional scope and sequence in the Language Strand Standards… albeit less so in the spelling Standards.

However, grade-level Language Strand Standards do not include a comprehensive spelling scope and sequence. A few examples from the L.2 Standards prove this out. Again, check out the simple to complex instructional order for the capitalization Standards.

The Conventions of Standard English (Standard 2) requires students to “Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English capitalization, punctuation, and spelling when writing.”

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.K.2.D  Spell simple words phonetically, drawing on knowledge of sound-letter relationships.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.1.2.D  Use conventional spelling for words with common spelling patterns and for frequently occurring irregular words.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.1.2.E  Spell untaught words phonetically, drawing on phonemic awareness and spelling conventions.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.2.2.C  Use an apostrophe to form contractions and frequently occurring possessives.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.2.2.D  Generalize learned spelling patterns when writing words (e.g., cage → badge; boy → boil).
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.3.2.E  Use conventional spelling for high-frequency and other studied words and for adding suffixes to base words (e.g., sitting, smiled, cries, happiness).
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.3.2.F  Use spelling patterns and generalizations (e.g., word families, position-based spellings, syllable patterns, ending rules, meaningful word parts) in writing words.
  •  CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.4.2.D and 5.2.D  Spell grade-appropriate words correctly, consulting references as needed.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.6.2.B, etc.  Spell correctly.
 After grade 3 the Common Core State Standards provide no specific spelling pattern Standards.

So, to summarize… Both educational research and the authors of the Common Core State Standards validate a simple to more complex mechanics sequence of instruction.

How Should This Affect My Spelling Instruction?

The simple to complex instructional order is clearly conducive to spelling patterns instruction. Students need to master the basic sound-spellings and sight words before moving on to more complex spelling patterns influenced by derivational affixes and roots. 

A spelling program with a comprehensive instructional scope and sequence, aligned to the Common Core Language Standards, College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards, and/or State Standards provides a well-defined instructional order.

Site levels (and districts) need to plan a comprehensive year-to-year scope and sequence for spelling instruction. The Common Core State Standards provide bare bones exemplars or benchmarks, but educators need to fill in the blanks. Students will not improve spelling by reading and writing alone. Students need more spelling instruction than a weekly pre and post test, a personal spelling errors notebook, or simply being required to spelling content vocabulary words correctly. Spelling instruction is sequential.

A Model Grades 4-8 Spelling Scope and Sequence

Preview the Grades 4-8 Spelling Scope and Sequence tied to the author’s comprehensive grades 4-8 Language Strand programs. The instructional scope and sequence includes grammar, usage, mechanics, spelling, and vocabulary. Teachers and district personnel are authorized to print and share this planning tool, with proper credit and/or citation. Why reinvent the wheel? Also check out my articles on Grammar Scope and Sequence, Mechanics Scope and Sequence, and Vocabulary Scope and Sequence.

Also check out the diagnostic spelling assessment and recording matrices on the Pennington Publishing website.

 

Pennington Publishing's Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary (Teaching the Language Strand) Grades 4-8 Programs

Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary (Teaching the Language Strand) Grades 4-8 Programs

The author of this article, Mark Pennington, has written the assessment-based grades 4-8 Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary (Teaching the Language Strand)  programs to teach the Common Core Language Strand Standards. Each full-year program provides 56 interactive grammar, usage, and mechanics worksheets and includes sentence diagrams, error analysis, mentor texts, writing applications, and sentence dictation formative assessments with accompanying worksheets (L.1, 2). Plus, each grade-level program has weekly spelling pattern tests and accompanying spelling sort worksheets (L.2), 56 language application opener worksheets (L.3), and 56 vocabulary worksheets with multiple-meaning words, Greek and Latin word parts, figures of speech, word relationships with context clue practice, connotations, and four square academic language practice (L.4, 5, and 6). Comprehensive biweekly unit tests measure recognition, understanding, and application of all language components.

The program also has the resources to meet the needs of diverse learners. Diagnostic grammar, usage, mechanics, and spelling assessments provide the data to enable teachers to individualize instruction with targeted worksheets. Each remedial worksheet (over 200 per program) includes independent practice and a brief formative assessment. Students CATCH Up on previous unmastered Standards while they KEEP UP with current grade-level Standards. Check out the YouTube introductory video of the author’s program.

[pdf-embedder url=”http://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/TLS-Instructional-Scope-and-Sequence-Grades-4-8.pdf”]

Spelling/Vocabulary , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

ELA and Reading Assessments

English-Language Arts and Reading Assessments

Following are accurate and teachable diagnostic grammar, usage, mechanics, spelling, and reading assessments and corresponding recording matrices to help teachers determine what students know and what they do not know. All but one assessment (fluency) are whole class assessments. Each assessment is comprehensive, not a random sample, to enable teachers to teach to the results of each test item. The author’s ELA/reading programs provide the resources for assessment-based whole class and individualized instruction. Click on the blue hyperlinks for the assessment resources.

Diagnostic Grammar and Usage Assessment with Recording Matrix (Paper Copy) 

Use this 40 item assessment to determine student’s knowledge of parts of speech, subjects and predicates, types of sentences, fragments and run-ons, pronoun usage, modifiers, verb tenses and verb forms. The author’s one-volume Teaching Grammar and Mechanics provides corresponding whole class lessons with grammar, usage, mechanics, and spelling instruction including sentence diagrams, mentor texts and formative assessments plus corresponding worksheets targeted to each item on the Grammar Assessment. Additionally, the author provides grade-leveled grades 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 Common Core aligned instruction in the Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary (Teaching the Language Strand) programs. Each comprehensive program includes full year programs in grammar, usage, mechanics, spelling, and vocabulary with all the resources teachers need for effective direct and individualized instruction. Student workbooks and complete diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments are part of these programs.

Mechanics Assessment (Paper Copy) 

Use this 32 item assessment to test students’ ability to apply correct usage of commas, capitalization, and all other essential punctuation. The author’s one-volume Teaching Grammar and Mechanics provides corresponding whole class lessons with grammar, usage, mechanics, and spelling instruction including sentence diagrams, mentor texts and formative assessments plus corresponding worksheets targeted to each item on the Mechanics Assessment. Additionally, the author provides grade-leveled grades 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 Common Core aligned instruction in the Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary (Teaching the Language Strand) programs. Each comprehensive program includes full year programs in grammar, usage, mechanics, spelling, and vocabulary with all the resources teachers need for effective direct and individualized instruction. Student workbooks and complete diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments are part of these programs.

Diagnostic Spelling Assessment (Paper Copy) *

Use this comprehensive diagnostic assessment to pinpoint all sound-spelling patterns learned from kindergarten through eighth grade. This 102 item eighth grade test pinpoints spelling deficits and equips the teacher to individualize instruction according to the assessment-data. The author’s Grades 4-8 Differentiated Spelling Instruction programs and the comprehensive Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary (Teaching the Language Strand) Grades 4-8 programs provide weekly spelling tests with spelling sorts, plus targeted worksheets to remediate each unknown assessment sound-spelling. Each worksheet includes a spelling sort and formative assessment.

Phonemic Awareness and Alphabetic Awareness (Paper Copies) 

Use these five phonemic awareness (syllable awareness, syllable rhyming, phonemic isolation, phonemic blending, phonemic segmenting) and two awareness assessments (upper and lower case identification and application) to determine reading readiness. Each of the seven assessments is administered whole class. The author’s Teaching Reading Strategies reading intervention program includes corresponding phonemic awareness and alphabetic awareness activities to remediate all deficits indicated by the assessments.

Vowel Sounds Phonics Assessment (Paper Copy) *

Use this comprehensive 52 item whole class assessment to determine your students’ mastery of short vowels, long vowels, silent final e, vowel digraphs, vowel diphthongs, and r-controlled vowels. The assessment uses nonsense words to test students’ knowledge of the sound-spellings to isolate the variable of sight word recognition. Unlike other phonics assessments, this assessment is not a random sample of phonics knowledge. The Vowel Sounds Phonics Assessment includes every common sound-spelling. Thus, the results of the assessment permit targeted instruction in any vowel sound phonics deficits. The author’s Teaching Reading Strategies reading intervention program includes corresponding worksheets and small group activities to remediate all deficits indicated by this assessment.

Consonant Sounds Phonics Assessment (Paper Copy) *

Use this comprehensive 50 item whole class assessment to determine your students’ mastery of consonant digraphs, beginning consonant blends, and ending consonant blends. The assessment uses nonsense words to test students’ knowledge of the sound-spellings to isolate the variable of sight word recognition. Unlike other phonics assessments, this assessment is not a random sample of phonics knowledge. The Consonant Sounds Phonics Assessment includes every common sound-spelling. Thus, the results of the assessment permit targeted instruction in any consonant sound phonics deficits. The author’s Teaching Reading Strategies reading intervention program includes corresponding worksheets and small group activities to remediate all deficits indicated by this assessment.

Sight Words (Outlaw Words) Assessment (Paper Copy)

Use this 99 item whole class assessment to determine your students’ mastery of the most common non-phonetic English words. The author’s Teaching Reading Strategies reading intervention program includes small group activities to remediate all deficits indicated by this 15-minute assessment. The program includes an Outlaw Words fluency article which uses all assessment sight words. The program also provides sight word game card masters and individual sets of business card size game cards in the accompanying Reading and Spelling Game Cards.

Rimes (Word Families) Assessment (Paper Copy) 

Use this comprehensive 79 item whole class assessment to determine your students’ mastery of the most common English rimes. Memorization and practice of these word families such as ack, eck, ick, ock, and uck can supplement an explicit and systematic phonics program, such as found in the author’s Teaching Reading Strategies reading intervention program. Experienced reading teachers know that different students respond differently to reading instruction and some remedial students especially benefit from learning onsets (such as consonant blends) and rimes. The program includes small group activities to remediate all deficits indicated by this 15-minute assessment. The program also provides rimes game card masters and individual sets of business card size game cards in the accompanying Reading and Spelling Game Cards.

Sight Syllables Assessment (Paper Copy)

Use this 49 item whole class assessment to determine your students’ mastery of the most common Greek and Latin prefixes and suffixes. Memorization and practice of these high utility affixes will assist with syllabication, spelling, and vocabulary development. The author’s Teaching Reading Strategies reading intervention program provides Greek and Latin prefix and suffix game card masters and individual sets of business card size game cards in the accompanying Reading and Spelling Game Cards.

The Pets Fluency Assessment (Paper Copy) *

The “Pets” expository fluency passage is leveled in a unique pyramid design: the first paragraph is at the first grade (Fleish-Kincaid) reading level; the second paragraph is at the second grade level; the third paragraph is at the third grade level; the fourth paragraph is at the fourth grade level; the fifth paragraph is at the fifth grade level; the sixth paragraph is at the sixth grade level; and the seventh paragraph is at the seventh grade level. Thus, the reader begins practice at an easier level to build confidence and then moves to more difficult academic language. As the student reads the fluency passage, the teacher will be able to note the reading levels at which the student has a high degree of accuracy and automaticity. Automaticity refers to the ability of the reader to read effortlessly without stumbling or sounding-out words. The 383 word passage permits the teacher to assess two-minute reading fluencies (a much better measurement than a one-minute timing).

* Placement Assessments

The author’s Teaching Reading Strategies reading intervention program includes 43 expository fluency articles (leveled in pyramid design from third to seventh grade reading levels) with word counts and timing charts. Two instructional options for fluency remediation are provided: small group choral reading and YouTube modeled readings at three different reading speeds. Corresponding vocabulary and comprehension worksheets are integral program components.

Spelling Patterns Assessment Matrix

Reading Assessments Recording Matrix

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Pennington Publishing’s mission is to provide the finest in assessment-based ELA and reading intervention resources for grades 4‒high school teachers. Mark Pennington is the author of two Standards-aligned programs: Teaching Essay Strategies and Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary (Teaching the Language Strand)Mark’s comprehensive Teaching Reading Strategies and the accompanying Sam and Friends Guided Reading Phonics Books help struggling readers significantly improve their reading skills in a full-year or half-year intensive reading intervention program. Make sure to check out the Pennington Publishing Blog index of hundreds of useful ELA/reading articles and free resources to help teachers use assessment-based whole class and individualized instruction to maximize learning for each of their students.

Grammar/Mechanics, Literacy Centers, Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary , , , , ,

Diagnostic Spelling Assessment

Don't Teach Visual Spelling

Spelling Is Not a Visual Skill

As an MA Reading Specialist and educational author of seven spelling books, I thought I’d pitch in to help teachers do a little  reflection on their spelling programs. Despite what many teachers have been taught, spelling is not a visual skill. Poor spellers do not necessarily have visual processing problems. If you have taught spelling through the shapes of letters, know that no orthographic spelling research supports this practice. Additionally, if you have taught spelling as individually-memorized sight words, best practices would certainly not suggest this practice. PluFinally, if you “teach” spelling by requiring students to spelling weekly vocabulary words correctly, please don’t.

Instead, teach the spelling system. It’s not perfect, but it does apply the alphabetic code. Learning the sound-spelling patterns will help your beginning and remedial spellers immensely, because spelling is primarily an auditory skill, mapping the sounds to letters.

Effective spelling programs match the nature of the English spelling system. There is a “rhyme and reason” to our spelling system; however, because our spellings have derived from a wide variety of languages and historical influences, several instructional approaches are needed to learn to spell well. Your students may have mastered some approaches, but be deficient in others. Therefore, a cookie-cutter curriculum may wind up re-teaching much of what your students already know, instead of focusing on what they do not yet know.

Good Spellers Aren't Good Always Good Readers

Good Readers Aren’t Always Good Spellers

Plus, despite what you may have heard, older students certainly can learn to spell. No orthographic research suggests that only primary age students learn to spell as developmental readers. Administer the Diagnostic Spelling Assessment and use corresponding resources to teach to the assessment deficits. Your students can catch up while they keep up with grade-level spelling instruction.

Poor Spellers Are Not Born That Way

Spelling is Not Genetic

Last, but not least, let’s get rid of the fallacy that good spelling or bad spelling are genetic predispositions. People were not born to be good or bad spellers. No brain research exists to suggest this conclusion. Even the worst spellers can learn with the proper resources. Spelling need not be a lifelong impediment for your students.

So, how should we teach spelling? A comprehensive diagnostic spelling assessment will help you choose the appropriate instructional approaches. If your students know it, they will show it; if they don’t, they won’t.

Spelling Download

The Diagnostic Spelling Assessment

This comprehensive sound-spelling diagnostic test has 102 spellings, unlike random sample spelling inventories. Along with a sight-syllable spelling assessment and a non-phonetic high utility words assessment, this Diagnostic Spelling Assessment will give teachers the data they need to plan effective spelling instruction. Plus the download includes an audio file of the assessment. Simply tell students to take out a piece of paper and get their pencils ready to spell.

The Diagnostic Spelling Assessment Mastery Matrix

Record the results of the Diagnostic Spelling Assessment on the The Diagnostic Spelling Assessment Mastery Matrix and analyze your students’ strengths and weaknesses. Match instructional resources to address the diagnosed deficits. Set specific learning goals and monitor progress as your students work toward mastery.

*****

Mark Pennington, MA reading specialist, is the author of the spelling assessment and accompanying grades 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 spelling programs.

Differentiated Spelling Instruction is a complete grade-level spelling program (4, 5, 6, 7, and 8) built upon conventional spelling rules and developmental spelling patterns. Plus, the program includes all resources teachers need to individualize instruction. Developing a weekly spelling plan that differentiates instruction for all of your students is a challenging task for even the best veteran teacher, but help has arrived! There is no better spelling program for your grade level students, GATE students, special ed, ESL/ELD, and below grade level students. Perfect for RtI. Here’s what teachers are saying about our program:

I work with a large ELL population at my school and was not happy with the weekly spelling tests, etc. Through my research in best practices, I know that spelling patterns and word study are so important at this age group. However, I just couldn’t find anything out there that combines the two. We have just adopted RtI at my school and your spelling matrix is a great tool for documentation. The grade level spelling program and remediation are perfect for my students. 

Heidi

Program Overview

FOR GRADE LEVEL INSTRUCTION: Here’s how this program works: Students take a spelling pattern pretest, then self-correct and personalize their weekly spelling list, using the resources in this book. The teacher explains the spelling pattern. Students complete the spelling pattern word sort for homework and self-correct in class. Students study their spelling lists and take the post-test (once a week or biweekly). After seven weeks of instruction, students take a summative assessment.

FOR DIFFERENTIATED (INDIVIDUALIZED) INSTRUCTION: Students take the Diagnostic Spelling Assessment (a comprehensive spelling patterns assessment… not a random sample qualitative spelling inventory), using the audio file included in the program. The teacher corrects the test and records spelling pattern deficits on the progress monitoring matrix.

Students complete targeted worksheets corresponding to the spelling patterns they missed on the diagnostic assessment. Each worksheet explains the spelling pattern, provides examples, includes a spelling sort, has a word jumble, rhyme, and/or book search, and includes a short formative assessment to determine whether or not the student has mastered the spelling pattern. Students self-correct the worksheet to learn from their mistakes, complete the formative assessment, and mini-conference with the teacher, who corrects the formative assessment to determine mastery. If mastered, the teacher marks as such on the progress monitoring matrix.

Now that’s effective differentiated instruction! Your students can catch up, while they keep up with grade level spelling instruction.

The program is easy to teach. We even provide a YouTube training video to ensure your success!

Plus, get these valuable resources to help your students develop their Personal Spelling Lists:

Spelling Teaching Resources

  • How to Study Spelling Words
  • Spelling Proofreading Strategies for Stories and Essays
  • Syllable Rules
  • Accent Rules
  • Outlaw Words
  • The 450 Most Frequently Used Words
  • The 100 Most Often Misspelled Words
  • The 70 Most Commonly Confused Words
  • Eight Great Spelling Rules, Memory Songs, and Raps (with Mp3 links)
  • Spelling Review Games
  • Formative and Summative Spelling Assessment Mastery Matrices

Administer my FREE comprehensive Diagnostic Spelling Assessment with audio file and recording matrix. It has 102 words (I did say comprehensive) and covers all common spelling patterns and conventional spelling rules. It only takes 22 minutes and includes an audio file with test administration instructions. Once you see the gaps in your middle school students spelling patterns, you’re going to want to fill those gaps.

Get the Diagnostic Spelling Assessment FREE Resource:

Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary , , , , , , , , , , ,