Running head: DIBELS ASSESSMENT 1

DIBELS Assessment

Debbie Roth

EDU 347
DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2

DIBELS Assessment

The Dynamic Indicators of Basic Skills (DIBELS) was given to a student named Peter on

October 16th, 2018. Peter is a fifth grade student who receives special education services in a

rural environment. He is eleven years old and lives with his mother and his sister. Peter is

sensitive to sounds and has some difficulty communicating to his peers that the sounds they are

making overwhelm him. He will sometimes yell at or make sounds at peers or the person he

wishes to be quiet. Peter is well organized but he struggles with impulsivity. When talking about

something he likes, Peter is animated and talkative. Some of Peter’s interests include drawing,

mimes, and origami. Art is Peter’s favorite subject and he wants to be a cartoonist when he

grows up.

In the middle of fourth grade, Peter received a STAR reading scaled score of 93, which

has the grade equivalence of 1.3. His reading fluency was 16 words correct per minute (wcpm)

with 67% accuracy. Peter is working on basic phonics skills and rules. He is also working on

dictating a sentence using correct capitalization, punctuation, and spelling with moderate teacher

assistance. Peter received a STAR math score of 541, approximately a third grade level. He

received an OST grade 3 math score of 708 with accommodations. In math, Peter’s strengths are

multiplication, division, geometry, and modeling. He struggles with numbers and operations.

When Peter takes assessments, he receives a variety of accommodations. These accommodations

include extended time, one-on-one administration, limited answer choices, a human reader,

repeated breaks, repeated directions, and a calculator for mathematics.

Procedures

Before administering the DIBELS to Peter, I first contacted his special education

teachers. Through email correspondence, we arranged a date and time for me to come into the
DIBELS ASSESSMENT 3

classroom to give the DIBELS. Upon arrival to the school, I signed in at the front desk. Then,

one of the students came to escort me to the classroom. I met Peter’s teachers and each of the

students in the class, including Peter, introduced themselves. Then Peter’s teacher gave me

background information about Peter. This was done verbally as well as by allowing me to look

through his IEP. Once I had recorded the relevant background information, I was able to begin

administering the DIBELS. Peter and I were in the special education classroom. No one else was

present during the assessment. Because Peter is a fifth grade student, he was given the DIBELS

Oral Reading Fluency (DORF) probe and the Daze probe.

The DORF probe was administered first. Before beginning, I instructed Peter to read the

story to me, doing his best. I told him that if he did not know a word, I would read the word for

him. After having him point to the first word in the passage, I prompted him to begin and started

my timer for one minute. While he read, I scored his reading according to the scoring rules.

When the minute was over, I told Peter to stop reading and took the passage away. Then, I asked

Peter to tell me everything he remembered about the story. While he spoke, I recorded the

number of words related to the passage and evaluated the quality of his response. This procedure

was followed with three different passages. After each passage, I provided Peter with verbal

praise and a high five.

Once we had completed the DORF, I offered Peter a break and a chance to draw, but he

said he would rather continue with the DIBELS. I administered the Daze next. Before beginning,

I explained to Peter that he would be given a worksheet and that he was to put his name on the

top. After completing this task, I explained that he was going to read a story with missing words

and that he would have to circle the word that best fit in the story from a list of three words in a

box. We completed the two practice examples and then I prompted Peter to begin. Peter was
DIBELS ASSESSMENT 4

given three minutes to complete the assessment, at which point I said “Stop” and gave Peter

verbal praise and a high five. I thanked Peter for working with me and then he gathered his

things and rejoined his general education class.

After Peter was gone, I completed the scoring of the DORF and scored the Daze

according to the scoring directions. Then I reported his results to his special education teacher

and thanked her for letting me come into her classroom and work with her student. I left the

school and then analyzed the data. Using both the background information and the test data, I

determined that two areas that should be targeted for improvement include phonics and fluency.

Once I determined the targeted areas for improvement, I researched evidence-based practices

that address these areas using a variety of resources and selected one strategy for each targeted

area.

Assessments Given

The DORF requires students to read a passage for one minute, during which the assessor

scores the reading, marking errors and self-corrections (Stoolmiller, Biancarosa, & Fien, 2013).

The student then receives a score measuring their wcpm. Three passages are read following these

procedures and the median is used to represent the student’s score (Stoolmiller et al., 2013). The

DORF measures phonics and word attack skills, accurate and fluent reading, and reading

comprehension. These skills are foundational to reading and reading achievement (Goffreda &

Diperna, 2009). Students must be able to decode words accurately and read fluently so that they

can comprehend text, the main goal of reading. Teachers can use the data gathered from the

DORF to identify areas of need and address those needs.

After the student has completed the reading for the DORF, the student gives an oral

retelling of the passage, including as many details as they can remember. The oral retelling is
DIBELS ASSESSMENT 5

scored according to how many on-task words the student says, as well as how many details are

given and how organized the student’s thoughts are during the retelling. The retelling portion of

the DORF assessment measures reading comprehension. As stated above, the DORF assessment

holds predictive validity for future reading achievement and can therefore be used to identify

students who may need additional interventions in order to become successful readers (Goffreda

& Diperna, 2009).

In the Daze assessment, approximately every 7th word is replaced with a box that contains

the correct word and two distractors from which the student is to pick (Kim, Vanderwood, &

Lee, 2016). The student is given 3 minutes to read the story silently and circle the correct words,

completing as much of the passage as they can (Kim et al., 2016). This assessment measures

reading comprehension. The Daze assessment requires students to construct meaning from text

using word recognition skills, background information and prior knowledge, familiarity with

linguistic properties such as syntax and morphology, and reasoning skills (Kim et al., 2016). This

assessment serves as an important indicator of students who may need additional interventions to

comprehend texts, the aim of reading. If students cannot comprehend text, they will not be able

to learn from texts. Comprehension is essential to reading, as it is the skill that ultimately makes

reading valuable.

Results and Analysis

For Peter’s first passage during the DORF assessment, Peter read 36 wcpm with 4 errors.

This puts Peter well below benchmark. He received a retell score of 33, putting him at

benchmark. The retell quality of response for this passage was a 4, placing Peter at or above

benchmark. For the second passage, Peter read 17 wcpm with 8 errors, putting him well below

benchmark once again. He received a retell score of 20, which is well below benchmark. He
DIBELS ASSESSMENT 6

received a 1 for the quality of his retell response, placing him below benchmark. However, these

retell scores probably reflect his difficulties with phonics and fluency more than difficulties with

comprehension, as he only read 17 words correctly. On the third passage, Peter read 22 wcpm

with 8 errors, placing him well below benchmark. He received a retell score of 20 which is also

well below benchmark. The quality of his retell response received a score of 2, which is at or

above benchmark. From the scores of the three passages, the median for both wcpm and errors

were found. The median score for wcpm was 22, well below benchmark. The median for errors

was 8. From this information, it was determined that Peter read with 73% accuracy. This score

for accuracy is well below benchmark.

This DORF data suggests that fifth grade passages are at a frustration level for Peter. He

made frequent errors on both sight words and phonetically regular words. He also frequently

sounded out words, reading only a few words automatically. Both his errors and his lack of

automaticity seem to support the current focus for Peter to learn basic phonics rules. In the third

passage, Peter struggled to read the word “tires” and had to be told the word the first two times it

appeared in the passage. On the next two appearances of the word, Peter correctly read “tires”

without assistance. This shows some degree of automaticity on re-read words. Despite his

difficulties reading the text itself, Peter demonstrated a great strength in his retellings. Peter was

able to demonstrate his comprehension of the text in his retellings, remembering details and,

when he had read enough of the passage, capturing the main idea.

Peter correctly selected 2 words during the Daze assessment. He made 4 incorrect

selections. Peter’s adjusted score for the Daze was therefore 0. This puts Peter well below

benchmark. Based on what is known about Peter, it is likely that this result came about because

of Peter’s difficulty with decoding words. Therefore, any attempt to evaluate Peter’s
DIBELS ASSESSMENT 7

comprehension skills should be made with great hesitation or be avoided altogether. During the

Daze assessment, Peter repeatedly began reading out loud. Peter also demonstrated possible

signs of frustration with the text, including sighing and tapping his pencil.

Test Score Benchmark Notes

Oral Reading Fluency Correct (Median): 22 Well Below Frequent errors with
Benchmark sight words
Errors (Median): 8
Frequent errors with
phonetically regular
words
Retell Fluency Median: 20 Well Below May be impacted by
Benchmark limited amount of
passage read
Quality of Retelling Median: 2 At or Above
Benchmark
Daze 0 Well Below Signs of frustration
Benchmark

Targeted Area A

One targeted area for improvement for Peter is phonics. Phonics involves the connections

between letters and sounds. This area is being targeted because Peter exhibited much difficulty

with decoding words during the DORF. He frequently made errors on phonetically regular

words. If a reader is unable to decode words in a text, they are unable to access the text and learn

from it. Therefore, phonics is a critical reading skill that must be mastered for students to be

successful readers. Because Peter frequently made errors on phonetically regular words, he

demonstrated a need for increased phonics instruction. Furthermore, the background information

gathered on Peter and his Daze results suggest that he has difficulty decoding words. In order for

Peter to become a strong reader, his phonics skills must improve.

One strategy that could be used to help Peter in the area of phonics is the Peer-Assisted

Learning Strategy (PALS). The PALS program is designed to help teachers differentiate
DIBELS ASSESSMENT 8

instruction across a wide range of achievement levels and modify instruction for students with

disabilities (Stein et al., 2008). A struggling reader is paired with a stronger reader and together

the pair works through structured activities while the teacher monitors and provides feedback

(Stein et al., 2008). After teaching students how to tutor one another with PALS, teachers

implement three 35-minute sessions each week with all children in the class (Fuchs & Fuchs,

2005). While the goal is for the stronger reader to help the weaker reader through direct

instruction and tutoring, PALS has also been shown to increase the skills of the stronger reader

(Stein et al., 2008). PALS includes a motivational component in which pairs receive points as

they progress through the activities together (Stein et al., 2008). Every four weeks, the teacher

changes the pairs of students to foster greater collaboration (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2005).

Stein et al. (2008) studied the effects of PALs on 2,959 kindergarten students from three

states across the United States over 2 years. In this study, PALS targeted specific phonics skills.

Participants were divided into four groups, including a control group. The teachers in each group

received a different degree of training and support. The teachers who received greater training

and support implemented PALS with greater fidelity. When teachers implemented PALS with

fidelity, students made gains in reading achievement. Fuchs and Fuchs (2005) summarize a

number of studies on PALS and conclude that, for the majority of students, PALS has positive

effects on reading achievement. These positive effects can be seen in areas of decoding and word

recognition, among others (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2005).

Using PALS, Peter’s progress would be monitored through the completion of activities

and the points his pair receives each week. Peter’s progress would also be monitored through

weekly probes similar to the DIBELS Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF) assessment.

Targeted Area B
DIBELS ASSESSMENT 9

A second targeted area of improvement for Peter is fluency. Fluency has many

components, including speed, accuracy, and expression (Ardoin, Morena, Binder, & Foster,

2013). Without fluent reading, a high level of comprehension is generally unlikely or impossible

(Chang & Millett, 2013). Instead of focusing on comprehension, readers who are not fluent

spend much of their mental effort on lower-level processing and therefore have difficulty

recalling or understanding what they have read (Chang & Millett, 2013). Currently, Peter’s speed

and accuracy are well below benchmark. During the DORF, he also failed to read with

expression and appropriate phrasing, possibly because of his difficulties with decoding.

One strategy to help increase reading fluency is repeated reading. Repeated reading can

be done silently or orally, with or without modeling by a teacher or other more able reader

(Chang & Millett, 2013). Repeated reading usually involves a student reading a passage for 1

minute three or four times until that student reaches a predetermined criteria of wcpm (Bennett,

Gardner, Cartledge, Ramnath, & Council, 2017). Alternatively, students can read short passages

the whole way through and time themselves, aiming to read the passage faster in each

consecutive trial. Although students can reread the passage silently to themselves, oral reading is

needed to collect data on reading rates, phrasing, and expression. One way to implement this

strategy is to pair students and have the students read the passages to each other. The student

who is not reading can be taught to score the readings. Improvement can be tracked on graphs,

making students aware of their progress.

Chang & Millett (2013) studied the reading rates of adult learners in a foreign language

when repeated readings were used as an instructional strategy. The adult learners who engaged in

repeated readings for 40 minutes once a week increased their reading rates by an average of 45

wcpm on unpracticed passages whereas those learners who did not engage in repeated readings
DIBELS ASSESSMENT 10

increased their reading rates by an average of only 7 wcpm on unpracticed passages. Bennett et

al. (2017) studied the effect of repeated reading on seven urban second-grade African American

students who were at risk for reading failure and special education. In this study, the repeated

reading was made culturally responsive through the use of culturally relevant stories. The

repeated readings were presented through the form of a computer program. In this study, all

participants made fluency gains on practiced passages and six made fluency gains on novel

passages. Both studies, therefore, suggest that repeated reading has a positive effect on reading

fluency.

Peter’s fluency progress would be monitored using the DORF. Each week, Peter would

be probed and his wcpm would be graphed. Ideally, Peter would be involved in the process so

that he could see his improvement and monitor his own learning.

Conclusion

Two DIBELS assessments were administered to Peter, a fifth grade student with special

needs. On the DORF, Peter scored well below benchmark for both wcpm and accuracy. Peter

scored well below benchmark on his retell fluency but his retell quality was at or above

benchmark. On the Daze assessment, Peter scored well below benchmark. Because of his

assessment data, it was determined that two targeted areas of intervention for Peter should be

phonics and fluency. Peter’s phonics needs can be addressed through the use of PALS while his

fluency needs can be addressed through repeated reading.

From this experience of administering the DIBELS, I have learned that curriculum-based

measures (CBM) are easy to give and take very little time while providing useful information

about student achievement and student needs. As a teacher, I plan to use CBMs regularly in my
DIBELS ASSESSMENT 11

classroom to assess students and graph their progress. This in turn will inform my instruction and

help me to differentiate instruction to meet the unique needs of each of my students.

Additionally, administering the DIBELS and making instructional decisions based on the

data has taught me how important it is to take into account multiple forms of assessment when

planning instruction. Peter’s results on the DIBELS alone would not have given me a full picture

of his needs. In interpreting his results, it was important for me to take into account the

background information I had gathered. Although CBM are a valuable tool, they need to be used

appropriately and should not be used in isolation.

DIBELS ASSESSMENT 12

Bibliography

Ardoin, S. P., Morena, L. S., Binder, K. S., & Foster, T. E. (2013). Examining the impact of

feedback and repeated readings on oral reading fluency: Let’s not forget prosody. School

Psychology Quarterly, 28(4), 391-404.

Bennett, J. G., Gardner, R. III, Cartledge, G., Ramnath, R., & Council, M. R. III. (2017). Second-

grade urban learners: Preliminary findings for a computer-assisted, culturally relevant,

repeated reading intervention. Education and Treatment of Children, 40(2), 145-186.

Chang, A. C-S. & Millett, S. (2013). Improving reading rates and comprehension through timed

repeated readings. Reading in a Foreign Language, 25(2), 126-148.

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2005). Peer-assisted learning strategies: Promoting word recognition,

fluency, and reading comprehension in young children. Journal of Special Education,

39(1), 34-44.

Goffreda, C.T. & Diperna, J. C. (2009). Preventive screening for early readers: Predictive

validity of the dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (DIBELS). Psychology in

Schools, 46(6), 539-552.

Kim, J.S., Vanderwood, M. L., & Lee, C. Y. (2016). Predictive validity of curriculum-based

measures for English learners at varying English proficiency levels. Educational

Assessment, 21(1), 1-18.

Stein, M. L., Berends, M., Fuchs, D., McMaster, K., Saenz, L., Yen, L., …Compton, D. L.

(2008). Scaling up an early reading program: Relationships among teacher support,

fidelity of implementation, and student performance across different sites and years.

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(4), 368-388.

DIBELS ASSESSMENT 13

Stoolmiller, M., Biancarosa, G., & Fien, H. (2013). Measurement properties of DIBELS oral

reading fluency in grade 2: Implications for equating studies. Assessment for Effective

Intervention, 38(2), 76-90.

DIBELS ASSESSMENT 14

Lesson Planning Template

Lesson Title: Repeated Readings Grade: 5

Learning Target: Given a grade-level prose passage, students will be able to read the passage at
a rate of 90 wcpm with 95% accuracy in 2 consecutive trials.
While listening to an oral reading, students will be able to identify the components of fluent
reading and evaluate the presence of those components using a rubric with 90% accuracy in 3 out
of 4 trials.

Grade Level Guide: Content Standards:

Content Curriculum Common Core State Interdisciplinary Connections

Focal Points (ie: Standards
NCTM, IRA,…)
NCTE Standard 3: CCSS.ELA- In calculating accuracy, students
Students apply a wide LITERACY.RF.5.4.B will be asked to record calculations
range of strategies to Read grade-level and use reasoning/estimation to
comprehend, interpret, prose and poetry evaluate whether their calculation is
evaluate, and orally with accuracy, likely correct.
appreciate texts. They appropriate rate, and CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.5.OA.A.2
draw on their prior expression on Write simple expressions that record
experience, their successive readings. calculations with numbers, and
interactions with other interpret numerical expressions
readers and writers, *Illinois uses without evaluating them. For
their knowledge of Common Core example, express the calculation
word meaning and of "add 8 and 7, then multiply by 2" as
other texts, their word 2 × (8 + 7). Recognize that 3 ×
identification (18932 + 921) is three times as large
strategies, and their as 18932 + 921, without having to
understanding of calculate the indicated sum or
textual features (e.g., product.
sound-letter
correspondence, Students will graph their data.
sentence structure, CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.5.G.A.2
context, graphics). Represent real world and
mathematical problems by graphing
points in the first quadrant of the
coordinate plane, and interpret
coordinate values of points in the
context of the situation.

Academic Language: Decoding, self-correction, words correct per minute, percent, expression,
phrasing, accuracy, rate, fluency
DIBELS ASSESSMENT 15

Key words will be introduced in the “during” portion of the lesson when the class discusses the
components of fluency and during explicit instruction on scoring. Multiple examples will be
given to explain the key words.

Students’ Needs: Students will need to know basic phonics rules as well as sight words and be
able to identify reading errors. These skills will be clearly connected to the new skills being
learned through discussion of the components of fluent reading. Students will also need to know
how to effectively use a calculator to add, subtract, and divide. This skill will be connected to the
scoring of oral readings.

Student Name Additional Support With: What the Teacher Will Do:

Peter Phonics/Decoding The learning target will be modified

for Peter to take into account his
Sight Words current reading level. Instead of
reading a fifth grade passage at a
rate of 90 wcpm with 95% accuracy
in 2 consecutive trials, Peter will
read a third grade reading passage
at a rate of 90 wcpm with 95%
accuracy in 2 consecutive trials.

Prior to this lesson, Peter will be

given the passage he will be
grading. With adult assistance,
Peter will become familiar with any
words that are difficult to decode
and any sight words he does not
know.

Prior to this lesson an adult will

review phonics rules and sight
words which appear in the passage
Peter is going to read.

Materials:
Student Needs:
 Pen or Pencil
 Calculator
Teacher Needs:
 Phonics and sight word flashcards
 Multiple reading passages (at least 12)
o Both student copies and teacher/scoring copies
 Multiple videos of passages being read (at least 5)
DIBELS ASSESSMENT 16

 Overhead projector or document camera

 Rubric template
 Blank graphs
 Stop watches
 White boards
 Dry erase markers
 Erasers for white boards

Language Function:
Evaluate fluency of oral reading, taking into account such aspects as rate, accuracy, phrasing,
and expression.
Demonstrate fluent reading by reading with appropriate rate, accuracy, phrasing, and expression.
Analyze improvement in rate, accuracy, phrasing, and/or expression after successive readings of
the same passage.

Lesson Plan (step by step sequence of the lesson)

Before: Students will brainstorm what makes someone a good reader. This will lead into a
discussion on fluency and the components of fluent reading. Students will then be told that
today they will both practice fluent reading and get to play a teacher. Both recognizing the
importance of fluent reading and getting to take on the role of a teacher will hopefully
motivate students. Before beginning the lesson, students will review phonics rules and sight
words through the use of flashcards and choral responding. These skills will be targeted in
review because they are needed in order to read fluently.

During: After reviewing, I will model for students how to read fluently for one minute. As I
read, I will ask students to recall what was said at the beginning of the lesson about fluent
reading and write down what I did well and what I could have done better while reading. After
finishing the one-minute reading passage, I will ask students to share what they wrote and the
class will discuss how to identify fluent reading. As a class, we will create a rubric for fluent
reading. I will then complete two more models of fluent reading, one poor and one exemplary.
After each passage, I will ask students to give a thumbs up if they think the passage was read
fluently and a thumbs down if not. Students will be prompted to refer to the rubric when
making their decision. Students will be asked to justify their answers.

Then, I will explicitly teach how to mark a one-minute reading passage through direct
instruction and modeling. Students will learn that they need to cross out incorrect words, insert
carrots when extra words are read, write sc above words that were self-corrected, and provide
the word when the reader pauses for more than 3 seconds. Students will also be taught to time
the reading and mark the last word read, then count the number of words read correctly.
Students will be taught how to calculate and record accuracy. After teaching the specific
symbols and calculations involved in scoring an oral reading, I will model the scoring
procedure using a video of a student reading a passage. This will include using the student-
created rubric to evaluate such elements as expression.
 DIBELS ASSESSMENT 17

I will play another video, this time scoring the reading with the students. This will be done by
pausing the video when marks need to be made and having students tell what mark is needed
through the use of whiteboards. Students will then be called on to explain why. Together, we
will fill in the rubric to score the reading, again using whiteboards and justification. Once we
have scored a video in this manner once or twice, I will have students score a video at the
same time as me but on their own copy of the passage. We will compare answers and talk
about any discrepancies that appear. If needed, we will score another video together until
students are able to score passages with at least 85% accuracy.

Behavior specific praise will be given throughout the lesson as students answer questions and
engage in class discussions. The target for OTRs during this lesson is at least 15.

After: Once students can score oral readings with at least 85% accuracy as demonstrated by
their scoring of the practice videos, they will be divided in half. Each student will receive one
passage. No students on opposite sides of the room should be given the same passage.
Students will be asked to read through their passage silently. If the student is unfamiliar with a
word, they will be instructed to ask another student on their side how to pronounce the word
and what it means. If the whole side is unfamiliar with a word or there is not agreement about
the pronunciation or meaning, the students will be instructed to ask the teacher. This portion of
assessment is to ensure that students can accurately score the passage they have been given.
When students are familiar with their passage, they will be prompted to give a thumbs up.

Students will then be given a partner from the opposite half of the class, so that partners are
familiar with different passages. In these pairs, students will take turns being the reader. As
one student reads the passage with which they were not familiarized, the other will mark the
passage and use the rubric to score the reading. Each student will read four times so that each
pair completes 8 oral readings, alternating the reader each time. Once students have completed
their readings, data will be graphed to show student progress and levels of achievement. While
students read, I will circulate the room and provide oral feedback to both readers and scorers.
Students who finish earlier than their peers will be prompted to read a self-selected book
silently.

Assessment:

Type of Description of Modifications or Evaluation Criteria

assessment assessment accommodations
Students will take N/A Students will write at least one positive
Notes notes on the positive aspect of the oral reading and at least
and negative one negative aspect of the oral reading,
Informal, attributes of an oral each relating to rate, accuracy,
Formative reading by the phrasing, or expression.
teacher.
Students will engage N/A Each student will share at least once
Discussion in various discussions with the whole class during the lesson.
throughout the The student’s contribution must relate
 DIBELS ASSESSMENT 18

Informal, lesson, sharing their to the question or topic being

Formative ideas and explaining discussed.
why they answered
the way that they did.
Students will give a N/A Students will respond to both readings
Thumbs Up, thumbs up to signify with either a thumbs up or a thumbs
Thumbs Down a fluent reading or a down. If asked, the student can defend
thumbs down to their choice, referring to the
Informal, signify an influent components of fluency that were
Formative reading. present or missing.

Students will Peter – Phonics Students will correctly score errors

Whiteboards demonstrate how to rules/decoding using appropriate marks/procedures
score errors in a skills and sight with 85% accuracy in 2 consecutive
Informal, reading passage by words will be trials.
Formative recording the reviewed with an
appropriate scoring adult prior to the
mark on their lesson
whiteboard
Students will score Peter – Phonics Students will score the oral reading of
Scored Practice practice passages to rules/decoding practice passages for rate, accuracy,
Passages demonstrate their skills and sight phrasing, and expression with 85%
ability to correctly words will be accuracy in 2 consecutive trials.
Informal, use oral reading reviewed with an
Formative scoring procedures. adult prior to the
lesson
Students will read a Peter – Phonics Students will be able to read a passage
Scored Student passage while a peer rules/decoding at a rate of 90 wcpm with 95%
Passages scores the passage, skills and sight accuracy in 2 consecutive trials.
demonstrating the words present in
Formal student’s rate and both the passage While listening to an oral reading,
accuracy while to be read and the students will be able identify the rate
reading. passage to be and accuracy of the reading with 90%
scored will be accuracy in 3 out of 4 trials.
Students will score a reviewed and
passage while a peer practiced with an
reads, demonstrating adult prior to the
the student’s ability lesson
to evaluate rate and
accuracy.
Scored rubrics of a N/A Students will read with both phrasing
Scored Rubrics student’s oral reading and expression in the “good” range or
will serve to identify higher according to the rubric in 2
Formal their expression and consecutive trials.
phrasing while
reading.
 DIBELS ASSESSMENT 19

While listening to an oral reading,

Students will score a students will be able evaluate the
peer’s oral reading phrasing and expression of the reading
using a rubric to using a rubric with 90% accuracy in 3
demonstrate their out of 4 trials.
ability to evaluate
expression and
phrasing as
components of
fluency.
Students will graph N/A Students will represent the data from
Graphs data relating to their their oral readings with 90% accuracy.
oral reading to track
Formal improvement over
successive readings.

Plan for Classroom Management: I will provide behavior specific praise throughout the lesson
for both academic and behavioral reasons. Students will be given various opportunities to
respond and various methods with which to respond. Students will be partnered with students
whom they work with well. When necessary, students will be redirected by the teacher or
paraeducator back to the task being completed. When students are not meeting established
behavioral expectations, the established consequences will be enforced.

Paraeducator Support: Prior to instruction, a paraeducator can be used to provide pre-teaching

to Peter. I would provide the paraeducator with the phonics rules and sight words to be reviewed
with Peter, as well as instructions for how to review. During the lesson, a paraeducator can be
used to help prompt students to use their rubrics and to stay on task.

Resources:

Rubric Template:

Excellent Good Poor

Phrasing

Expression