workbook essential reports

MAP Reading Fluency Essential Reports WorkbookMAP Reading Fluency Essential Reports | 2
Overview Get hands-on with your reports. Learn how to access, interpret, and apply rich data. Then plan how to use
data to inform ongoing work and share that data with students and families.
Table of contents 3 How Do the Components of Early Reading Relate to Each Other and Instruction?
10 How Are My Students Doing?
14 How Do I Decide When and How to Use Reading Data? (onsite only)
17 Learning Centers (onsite only)
23 How Do I Share My Students’ MAP Reading Fluency Data?
24 Planning Forward
MAP® reports site
MAP Reading Fluency Essential Reports | 3
How Do the Components of Early Reading Relate to Each Other and Instruction?
READING 01 How Do Children Learn to Read? By Cindy Jiban, PhD, Solutions Content Lead at NWEA
How do children learn to read? While the amount of research informing this answer is overwhelming, a
framework that reading researchers offered decades ago can help distill what we know into some simple
components. This framework is the Simple View of Reading, first established by Gough and Tunmer in 1986.
Decoding: converging foundational skills
Phonological awareness
In the broader effort to learn to decode, sounds and graphic representations come together. Phonological
awareness, though, is limited to knowledge and skills with sounds. When students who do not yet know
their letters play at rhyming, clapping out syllables, or stretching words out to hear sounds, they are
working in the area of phonological awareness.
Research has largely converged on the finding that progression in phonological awareness is in the
direction from larger chunks of sound to smaller ones (Adams et al. 1998; Anthony et al. 2002; Anthony
and Lonigan 2004; Gillon 2004; Goswami 2000; Paulson 2005; Schatschneider et al. 1999). Students are
aware of and can work with whole words as sounds, then syllables, then parts of syllables such as onsets
and rimes, and, finally, individual phonemes. Across these various units, blending sounds is typically easier
than segmenting sounds.
Growth in phonological awareness can continue past the primary grades, but a typical trajectory shows
that most of the growth is achieved before third grade (Berninger, Abbott, Nagy, and Carlisle 2010).
Phonics and word decoding
Word decoding: Beginning with letter sounds and moving to word reading, decoding is the task of turning
sets of letters on the page into the sounds they represent. Phonics is a term more particular to instruction,
focusing on the systematic ways that spellings relate to speech sounds (Snow, Burns, and Griffin 1998).
Broadly, youngest children begin to approach word identification logographically, according to Frith’s
model (1985); they recognize how a whole word looks without attending to letter sounds at all. Next, after
understanding the alphabetic principle, they shift to an alphabetic stance, relying on letter sounds quite
adamantly. At least in initial phases, students attend more to initial sounds in words than to medial or final
sounds (Guthrie and Seifert 1977). Gradually, they use letter sounds and phonics patterns to move from
consonant-vowel-consonant (CVC) words to single-syllable words with blends, digraphs, and long-vowel
spellings; later still, they read multisyllabic words (Guthrie and Seifert 1977; Pirani-McGurl 2009).
Relationship between phonemic awareness and word decoding
Decoding and phonemic awareness have an overlapping learning trajectory in typical early reading
development. The two are codependent and reciprocal (Perfetti et al. 1987). Both segmenting and
blending skills are enlisted in decoding unfamiliar words (Johnson and Baumann 1984). Moreover,
researchers have reaffirmed that development in decoding in turn facilitates growth in phonemic
awareness: it is easier to process the task of blending or manipulating sounds when a visual
symbol—a letter—is engaged to represent each sound (Shanahan and Lonigan 2010).
You can access the complete bibliography in the course called MAP Reading Fluency Essential Reports: Resources in NWEA Professional Learning Online.
READING 02 Components of Language Comprehension By Cindy Jiban, PhD
While phonics and phonological awareness contribute to the overall construct of decoding, another
critical feature of development in the primary grades is language comprehension. By third grade,
US students are typically expected to be proficient at reading with comprehension. Weak language
comprehension at school entry, coupled with a lack of instructional focus, will impair students’ future
success (Shanahan and Lonigan 2008).
In Gough and Tunmer’s Simple View of Reading (1986), reading with comprehension (RC) is the product
of decoding (D) proficiency and language comprehension (LC). Even if students’ decoding skills are
perfect, a weakness in understanding language—its vocabulary, structure, and syntax—will suppress
reading comprehension.
Roth, Speece, and Cooper (2002) found that kindergarten vocabulary development, when measured not
just by the typical “naming” style of vocabulary but also by a definitional style in which students elaborate
about a word, explains 23% of reading comprehension at second grade.
While evidence has accumulated that vocabulary knowledge is predictive of future reading comprehension,
the strength of that prediction is greater when a broader understanding of oral language is used in
research. As noted in the 2008 National Early Literacy Panel report, language comprehension has been
found to play a bigger role in later literacy achievement when it is measured using more complex metrics
that include grammar, the ability to define words, and listening comprehension than when measured using
only simple vocabulary knowledge (Shanahan and Lonigan 2010).
Listening comprehension
For students not yet reading connected text independently, exploration and instruction involving books
still aims at student comprehension. What begins as listening comprehension gradually expresses itself
via reading comprehension, as fluent decoding develops. Garcia and Cain’s 2014 meta-analysis found that
student improvements in decoding increased reading comprehension only to the extent that the reader’s
listening comprehension was strong. This finding echoes the central assertion of the Simple View of
Reading (Gough and Tunmer 1986).
Foorman et al. (2015) found that listening comprehension and vocabulary contribute to a larger oral language
factor, a factor that explains substantial variance in reading comprehension among first- and second-graders.
Reading comprehension
While only some first- and second-graders can read with sufficient fluency for comprehension to be solid,
it is imperative that student progress toward this proficiency be tracked in the primary grades. Students
are developing comprehension skills even as they rely on others to read aloud smoothly to them (National
Reading Panel 2000; Whitehurst and Lonigan 2001).
READING 03 How Fluency Informs Reading Comprehension
From 8 to 80 in Two Years: How Fluency Drives Students Toward Comprehension
By Cindy Jiban, PhD
Ask any primary grades teacher about reading fluency, and you are likely to hear something
about WCPM from one-minute oral readings. (That’s Words Correct Per Minute, a bit like miles per hour.)
You might even hear some benchmark numbers that describe how this number goes up in the primary
grades. It’s true: in first and second grades, students are typically increasing their reading speed limit from
about 8 WCPM to over 80 WCPM (Hasbrouk and Tindal 2006).
That might not be NASCAR®-worthy acceleration, but going from 8 to 80 really ends up being one of the
Great Wonders of the World. Consider this: at 8 WCPM, Junior is totally consumed by the task of sounding
out or recognizing each word, one by one. No one listening to him read aloud will be able to follow the
story—including Junior himself. But by a year or so later, Junior will be reading 80 words per minute and
understanding many phrases and sentences as he is reading them. A whole world opens up to Junior, by
way of reading comprehension.
How does fluency work this magic? Pulled apart, three key elements each play a huge role in that move to
reading with comprehension: rate, accuracy, and prosody.
Rate matters mostly because it gives us a window into how much effort it takes kids to decode each
word. When each word is a puzzle, it’s really hard to attend to the meaning that is accumulating across
whole sentences. Words must be read with sufficient accuracy, too: you can’t build the right meaning with
too many wrong words. Together, rate and accuracy make up what LaBerge and Samuels (1974) called
“automaticity.” For students with automatic enough word recognition, the mental processing resources
required for decoding are minimized. This frees up attention so the reader can attend to meaning.
A student’s WCPM predicts reading comprehension, especially in the primary grades time while rate is
accelerating (Garcia and Cain 2014). Kids who can read 40 WCPM are not as likely to understand what
they read as kids who read 80 WCPM. Accuracy also becomes an excellent window into how well a
student might understand different levels of text, particularly once students have gathered some initial
speed in their reading. This is because a student with higher accuracy is likely using all kinds of clues to
figure out if a word is what they think it is. They don’t just use decoding skills, but context and meaning
clues as well (Valencia and Buly 2004).
We can’t forget about prosody, though: it’s already neglected in the fluency family. Prosody means
expression and phrasing that support meaning: it’s that certain something that many primary grades
teachers do so well in read-alouds. We want kids reading with prosody, too. We don’t want them
“barking at text,” calling out words as if they are a list. Prosody works as a bridge from automaticity to
comprehension. Research is showing that when we attend to a student’s prosody in addition to their rate
and accuracy, we get better insight into their path to reading with comprehension (Basaran 2013).
So yes, WCPM is accelerating across the primary grades, through various numbers and benchmarks.
But of course, this is NOT a speedway. We don’t want kids accelerating just to go fast but get nowhere.
Instead, there is a destination: reading with comprehension, in more and more challenging text. Fluency
is not the end goal; fluency is the horsepower that takes kids to this exciting new world. It combines
well-tuned rate, accuracy, and prosody—turns out, there’s a lot going on under the hood.
Jiban, Cindy. November 28, 2017. “From 8 to 80 in Two Years: How Fluency Drives Students Toward Comprehension.” Teach. Learn. Grow. (blog). https://www.nwea.org/blog/2017/8-80-two-years-fluency-drives-students-toward-comprehension.
Oral Reading Fluency Study rubric
Review the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) passage reading expression rubric
(page 10, figure 2) that the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) set for the progression of
reading with expression.
LEXILE® is a trademark of MetaMetrics, Inc., and is registered in the United States and abroad. Copyright © 2021 MetaMetrics, Inc. All rights reserved.
Key terms Decoding
Phonics
in auditory words
and prosody
Measures both a student’s oral reading ability
and the oral readability of the text
Uses the same scale as the Lexile reading
measure for silent reading to allow comparison
Reading comprehension
making connections with prior knowledge
Opportunity for meaningful growth scenarios
NOTES
NOTES
Natalie is a first-grade student who loves to read. She
always volunteers to read aloud to the class. She reads
more words correctly per minute than most kids in class
when reading short sentences with decodable words
aloud. I noticed sometimes she says the words correctly
but is not always able to explain the meaning of the
sentence or choose a picture that matches that meaning.
She’s reading more grade-level passages this spring.
Although she can usually state the main idea and
identify some details, she needs more practice making
inferences and summarizing.
takes reading assessments in both Spanish and English.
In both languages, he can read connected texts, but
I’ve noticed that Hammond seems to be able to read
more complex texts in Spanish than in English.
When reading passages in Spanish, he can read
grade-level passages and answer literal comprehension
questions correctly most of the time. However, with
English passages, Hammond’s accuracy rate goes
down, and he struggles with literal comprehension
questions for grade-level texts.
Chris is a fifth-grade student who is very social and
likes science, PE, and music. I can tell he’s nervous
when we read with partners, but he seems really
engaged whenever I’m reading aloud to the class
during direct instruction.
less-complex reading passages and answer the
questions correctly, but I’m impressed by how much he
understands. Moreover, he answers complex questions
when he listens to someone else read. Chris tries really
hard when reading independently, and I have noticed
it takes him a lot longer to read even short sentences
than it takes some of the other kids in class.
NOTES
Discuss
How does understanding the reading framework support identifying the opportunity for meaningful
growth for students?
How Are My Students Doing?
Essential reports How will you use each report? Add your notes and ideas.
Benchmark Matrix Report
Individual Student Report: Dyslexia Screener Flagged Student
Individual Student Report: Oral Reading
Individual Student Report: Foundational Skills Flagged Student
Term Comparison
Exploring reports
Directions
Explore each report. Use the Performance Level Key and the Interpretive Tables in the Help Center to help
you to answer the corresponding questions.
How is my class doing?
The Benchmark Matrix shows how the students in your class performed on the MAP Reading Fluency
benchmark assessment. The report also gives the outcome of the universal screener performed during
the test.
Questions to consider
+ What is the breakdown of students with Foundational Skills data versus those with Oral Reading data?
+ Do any areas have a large proportion of students meeting or exceeding grade-level expectations?
Below or approaching grade-level expectations?
+ How can what you’ve learned inform your whole-class instruction?
OBSERVATIONS IMPLICATIONS
How are individual students doing?
Individual student reports allow you to look at detailed data about how an individual student performed
on the MAP Reading Fluency benchmark or progress monitoring assessment.
+ What information is available for students on Foundational Skills versus Oral Reading?
+ Focus on a student whose needs are slightly different from the rest of the group. What’s the
opportunity for meaningful growth for this student?
+ What does the reader profile and next steps tell you about what best meets this student’s needs?
+ Can you meet this student’s needs during classroom instruction, or is more targeted intervention or
instructional support needed?
How are groups of students doing?
The Benchmark Matrix shows how the students in your class performed on the MAP Reading Fluency
benchmark assessment, and using the sort function helps identify students with similar needs.
+ What is the balance of Foundational Skills versus Oral Reading data?
+ Did any students receive an orange flag, indicating their performance shows possible risk factors for
general reading difficulties?
+ Find a group of students with similar results in a key area. What’s the common opportunity for growth
among these students?
+ How would you structure your small-group instruction to meet this group’s needs?
+ How can what you’ve learned inform your small-group instruction?
OBSERVATIONS IMPLICATIONS
How Do I Decide When and How to Use Reading Data? (onsite only)
NOTES
Meet Ms. Richards, Natalie’s teacher Ms. Richards wants to strengthen the small-group component
of her reading block in her first-grade classroom as she
prepares for the last few months of the school year. She has five
flexible groups and is preparing to adjust the instructional focus
and group placement for students now that she has new data
on their reading needs.
Ms. Richards thinks she has more students reading some
connected text at this time than she’s had in the past, but she
has many students who are still building other early reading
skills. She knows that some groups need to focus more on
reading fluency or reading comprehension, while others need to
develop foundational skills. Ms. Richards also has two students
who received an orange flag for the universal screener outcome.
Meet Mr. Barnes, Hammond’s teacher Mr. Barnes starts his reading block with whole-group instruction
for his second-grade students. His students are in a bilingual
program, and he’s observed a trend in his class: many students
show stronger reading fluency and basic comprehension when
reading texts in Spanish compared to texts in English.
As a result, Mr. Barnes wants to think about how to use the
vocabulary and comprehension components of his whole-group
instruction effectively. Though he knows those are the topic
or general content needs, he wants to be strategic with the
focus of his questions and tasks. Mr. Barnes has data from
several sources on his students’ reading abilities, so he wants
to figure out what to look at to inform the choices he makes
when designing that whole-group instruction and planning his
questions and other learning activities.
NOTES
Connecting data to practice
Brainstorm the possibilities for using reading data for instructional planning. Consider the following:
+ What data of yours relates to each component of the Simple View of Reading?
+ When and how often do you get that data?
+ What aspects of instructional planning might that data inform? Examples: small- versus whole-group
planning, determining flexible group placement versus determining support/acceleration needs
NOTES
NOTES
Meet Ms. Kotifani, Chris’s teacher Ms. Kotifani is a fifth-grade teacher, and she has always taught
upper-elementary school grades. Though she’s had some
students who struggled with foundational reading skills in the
past, teaching skills like phonics and phonological awareness
isn’t common to her core curriculum.
This year she has one student, Chris, who she noticed
is struggling with basic reading skills when working
independently but seems to do much better when he hears a
story read aloud. Ms. Kotifani knows she needs to build strong
intervention plans to help Chris with the unfinished learning in
those foundational areas. She also wants to think about how
she can ensure that he continues to interact with grade-level
texts and think through appropriately challenging questions
that address the more advanced reading skills of his grade
level. Ms. Kotifani needs to be strategic with how she uses her
reading data to plan for Chris.
Part 2
1. Individually, brainstorm three instructional scenarios you experience in your reading instruction. Record
them in the left column of the table. Refer to your Benchmark Matrix Report to see students’ current data.
2. As a small group, discuss the instruction you would give based on that data and capture your ideas in
the right column of the table. Consider: Which data will inform planning and monitoring instruction?
Which instructional practices or resources will support progress?
SCENARIO NOTES ON DATA + INSTRUCTION
SCENARIO 1
SCENARIO 2
SCENARIO 3
Learning Centers (onsite only) Choose the topic you’d like to investigate further.
01 Making the Most of Instruction Explore how to use whole- and small-group instruction to target the needs of your students.
Using your MAP Reading Fluency data, select an area of instructional focus and create a short
plan for instruction.
02 Fluency Development Lesson Explore how the 25-to-30-minute Fluency Development Lesson (FDL) can support your
students’ fluency development. Understand the process, then plan how you might integrate it
into your instruction.
Go to page 19.
03 Integrating Play Into Literacy Centers For new readers, explore play-based learning centers that use evidence-based instructional
practices to make learning engaging and effective for young students.
Go to page 20.
04 Providing Instruction for Students With the Dyslexia Predictive Flag
Learn tips for providing instructional and next steps for students whose performance suggests
possible risk factors for dyslexia or other reading difficulties.
Go to page 21.
Use MAP Reading Fluency data to target:
LEARNING CENTER 01 Making the Most of Instruction
Whole-group vs. small-group instruction
+ For all students
+ Can occur throughout the day
+ Capture formative data
+ For all students
+ Targeted, needs-based instruction
+ Capture formative data
Foundational Skills, you can leverage
whole-group instruction.
sound and spelling patterns, you can leverage
small-group instruction.
AREA OF FOCUS
What instructional modeling will you provide to students?
How/where will you assess student progress at the end of the small group?
What text (or other resources) will students use? How will students practice the skill?
TEACHING POINT (MODEL)
ASSESSMENT/PROGRESS TRACKING
LEARNING CENTER 02 Fluency Development Lesson The Fluency Development Lesson (FDL) is a fluency intervention developed by Timothy Rasinski, Nancy
Padak, Wayne Linek, and Elizabeth Sturtevant. Rasinski describes the FDL in an article in Reading Today:
“This daily lesson combines modeling fluent reading, assisted reading, and repeated (and wide) reading,
and takes no more than 25 to 30 minutes.”
Directions
1. Individually or with a partner, access From Phonics to Fluency: Effective and Engaging Instruction to Two Critical Areas of the Reading Curriculum by Timothy Rasinski
• Read pages 2–5 for a refresher on fluency
• Read the “Fluency Development Lesson” steps on page 14
2. Write and/or discuss how the FDL could support your students’ fluency progress
3. Respond to the guiding questions below
Guiding questions
+ Is fluency an area of meaningful growth for your students? For many, some, or a few?
+ In your current schedule, where might you have 25–30 minutes to implement the FDL?
+ How would you introduce the FDL and its purpose to students? Draft a short (90–120 second)
introduction for the lesson, then practice with a partner for feedback and revise.
Supplemental reading Delivering Supportive Fluency Instruction—Especially for Students Who Struggle by Timothy Rasinski in Reading Today
NOTES
IF TIME ALLOWS
Choose a fluency passage to use for an FDL with students (see sample passages on pages 16–32) and
plan how/when you’ll introduce it with your students.
LEARNING CENTER 03 Integrating Play Into Literacy Centers
Directions
1. Individually or with a partner, watch the Integrating Play Into Literacy Instruction video from the
Institute of Education Sciences.
2. As you watch, prepare to stop, respond to the guiding questions below, and capture other notes.
Note: The video clip lengths may exceed the time allotted for the Learning Center. You may want to
choose two to three practices to focus on during this time.
Practices
speech and how they link to letters
+ Watch this clip: 2:44–5:00
Practice 2
parts, and write and recognize words
Practice 3
to comprehend, learn, and remember content
Practice 4
strategies
Which practices mirror your current practice?
What’s new that you might use?
LEARNING CENTER 04 Providing Instruction for Students Flagged by the Dyslexia Screener An outcome flag on the Dyslexia Screener indicates that the student performance suggests possible risk
factors for dyslexia or other reading difficulty. These factors may include difficulties with fluent and/or
accurate word recognition, phonological processing, decoding, and/or spelling. A flag on this screener
does not indicate a diagnosis of dyslexia or other reading disability. Educators should address possible
reading difficulties with any student whose performance was flagged. While follow-up will vary by district
and state, here are recommendations for supporting students who have been flagged:
+ Increase focus on clear and planful instruction in phonological awareness, sound symbol
correspondences, and phonics
+ Increase communication with families about this student’s reading needs
Use your MAP Reading Fluency data to create a plan for a flagged student(s)
Decide on a focus area and list the sequence of skills to be taught
Note: Systematic instruction in phonics is a methodical sequence of instruction that deliberately moves
through building-block decoding skills. This is the opposite of a fully incidental approach, in which skills
are addressed as they may appear in picture books during read-aloud sessions.
List skills sequence here List skills sequence here List skills sequence here
Sound symbol correspondence Phonics
SKILL
SKILL
(parent, caregiver, student,
(e.g., what’s being shared,
test data)
DATES OF INSTRUCTION DATE OF PROGRESS MONITORING
Draft a communication plan
Create a monitoring plan
Note: Explicit instruction includes directly stating patterns and rules and designing opportunities to try
them instead of waiting for kids to discover patterns in words. The teacher says and shows explicitly,
following up with chances to read and build words containing the word pattern.
How Do I Share My Students’ MAP Reading Fluency Data?
Communicating with families In preparing to talk with families about their child’s reading progress, what three points will you share?
Think about your priorities: to communicate how their child is doing, what you’re doing in the classroom,
and how they can support their child at home.
Communicating with students In preparing to talk with students about their reading progress, what three points would you share? Would
these be the same points you share with families? How might you involve students in talking about their
reading data?
Who will collaborate with you or support this
work? Who needs to be informed?
How will you implement your plan?
When will you reevaluate your plan?
In your role, what will you do with the
information you learned today to support
student growth?
Planning Forward
© 2021 NWEA. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be modified or further distributed without written permission from NWEA.
NWEA and MAP are registered trademarks, and MAP Growth and MAP Reading Fluency are trademarks, of NWEA in the US and in other countries.
The names of other companies and their products mentioned are the trademarks of their respective owners.
METAMETRICS® and LEXILE® are trademarks of MetaMetrics, Inc., and are registered in the United States and abroad. Copyright © 2021 MetaMetrics, Inc. All rights reserved.
Illustrations on pages 8, 14, and 15 © 2017 Adam Simpson and Heart.
We are providing links to the third-party website(s) contained in this material only as a convenience, and the inclusion of links to the linked site does not imply any endorsement, approval, investigation, verification, or monitoring by us of any content or information contained within or accessible from the linked site. NWEA does not control the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or appropriateness of the content or information on the linked site. If you choose to visit the linked site, you will be subject to its terms of use and privacy policies, over which NWEA has no control. In no event will NWEA be responsible for any information or content within the linked site or your use of the linked site. By continuing to the linked site, you agree to the foregoing.
July 2021 | MRF145
Notes on Progress Monitoring Matrix Report:
Notes on Dyslexia Screener Matrix Report:
Notes on Individual Student Report: Dyslexia Screener Flagged Student :
Notes on Individual Student Report: Oral Reading:
Notes on Individual Student Report: Foundational Skills Flagged Student:
Notes on Term Comparison:
Notes on Ms:
Scenario 1:
Scenario 2:
Scenario 3:
What instructional modeling will you provide to students?:
How/where will you assess student progress at the end of the small group?:
What text (or other resources) will students use?:
How will students practice the skill?:
Notes on guiding questions:
Skill 1:
Skill 2:
Idea for explicitly teaching skill 1:
Idea for explicitly teaching skill 2:
Monitoring Plan skill dates of instruction:
Communication Plan: When will you communicate Row 1:
Communication Plan: When will you communicate Row 2:
Monitoring Plan skill dates of progress monitoring:
Communication Plan: Detail of what will be communicated Row 1:
Communication Plan: Detail of what will be communicated Row 2:
Notes on communicating with families:
Notes on communicating with students:
With your students:
How will you implement your plan?:
Who will collaborate with you or support this work? Who needs to be informed?:
When will you reevaluate your plan?:
Within your school or district:

workbook essential reports

Documents