Results and Analysis of Youtube Assessments

Results:
Word Lists:  
Grade 1- 80% Automatic- Instructional  85% Total- Instructional
Grade 2 (first try)-  5% Automatic- Frustration  5% Total- Frustration
Grade 2-  70% Automatic- Instructional  90% Total- Independent
Grade 3-  10% Automatic- Frustration  15% Total- Frustration


Oral Reading:
Passage Name:  Mouse in a House
Readability Level: 1
Passage Type- N
78% Familiar
Total Accuracy:  96% Instructional
Retelling:  27%
# Explicit:  4
# Implicit:  0
Comprehension:  67%
Total Passage Level:  Instructional


Passage Name:  Whales and Fish
Readability Level:  2
Passage Type:  E
78% Unfamiliar
Total Accuracy:  97% Instructional
Retelling:  29%
# Explicit:  2
# Implicit: 4
Comprehension:  75%
Total Passage Level:  Instructional, but I would consider trying a Grade 3 passage because the results are borderline.


* Note:  I was doing what the book calls "Total Accuracy" except that I did not count Self Corrections as errors.  This also may skew the results while using the book's given scales that indicate level.


Explanation:


Because of the student's low speaking voice and whispering during the reading list portion, it was difficult on my computer (without additional speakers) to tell the difference between her speaking out a word and her whispering trying to sound out the word.  It is because of this that I counted correct anything that I could hear and understand whether it would be in a soft speaking voice or a whisper.  During the second round of Word List 2, see originally skipped numbers 17-19, but she got them correct when she went back to them.  It is because of this, I counted them correctly identified but not automatic which is why the scores between automatic (70%) and total (90%) are so different.  I also felt that the student had some confidence issues especially during Word List 2.  Unfortunately, Word List 3 was intimidating to the student and she was unable to continue.  I'm sure that she didn't know all the words on the list, but once she got to the word "rough" she got discouraged.  It is because of these results that I think working on sight words and spelling patterns could help her raise her reading level.


During the reading of Mouse in a House, the student had some issues with the endings of words such as saying "years" for "year", "walls" for "wall", "floor" for "floors", and "visit" instead of "visited".  I honestly think that she may have not been paying attention and did not use contextual clues to make these corrections.  She may also lack the knowledge of tenses when she confuses "come" for "came" etc.  There was one possible miscue that I was hesitant to count:  When the student says "They" when it was supposed to be "Then" at the beginning of a sentence, but then she pauses a second and says "Then".  I'm not sure whether this was a Self Correction or an Insertion so I counted it as a miscue for the time being (just for the sake of practice).  I counted 12 ideas during her retelling and I found her comprehension to be Instructional because I counted her response "Because they love mouse" incorrect even though this was only due to her miscue during her reading.


During her reading of Whales and Fish she continued her pattern with the ends of some words such as "lived" for "live" and "animal" for "animals".  She also mispronounced "most" for "must" and "thought" for "through".  These are definitely visual graphic miscues that could possibly be helped with practicing sight words.  During this particular reading, she had many Self-Corrections and Repeated, but I believe that it was because this was an unfamiliar expository text so whenever she was unsure of a pronunciation or whether a sentence sounded correct, she would repeat it.  I counted 14 ideas in her retelling and found her comprehension to be much better than I thought it would be.  She got correct more implicit answers than explicit, though, which may be a problem because this is an expository text and students should be taking and using information located in the text rather than from prior knowledge.  For instance, the question:  "According to the passage, how are whales and fish different?" the student responded that "whales are bigger and fish are smaller".  This was an implicit answer, but it was not from the text.  Also, this is a generalization.  Yes, most whales are bigger than fish, but there are some relatively smaller whale species in the world and there are also some gigantic fish as well.  We can't really say that this one is correct, so I counted in wrong.  On the other hand, she answered the question, "Where are fins?" with "at the back".  She didn't explicitly say "tail" so I counted it as an implicit answer instead because she understands the general idea, but the specific detail doesn't come to her mind.


To help the student with her reading, I feel that working on sight words, her being explicitly taught the tenses (past, present, future), and teaching her strategies to link important details to the main point of an expository text would be an excellent start to strengthen her literacy skills.