I administered the ERSI to one of my students this past week. The classroom is designated a MOCI classroom. We currently have five students ranging in age from 9-11. The student that took the ERSI is my most verbal, and cognitively highest functioning. In order to administer the assessment to my other students it would require adapting the material immensely.
The results: He scored a 25.46 (grand total); 9.61 (Alphabet); 8.75 (COW); 3.10 (PA); 4.00 (WR). For the alphabet section, I discarded the 'production' section as this particular student is at the scribble phase of writing and doesn't produce letter forms yet. He had no problem finding the letters on his IPAD when asked. In addition, for the PA section, he used his IPAD (Proloquo2go app) to write the words. This is a fairly new concept for him, so the results were not unexpected.
The assessment shows he 'gets' the alphabet and sounds the letters make. When asked what a letter was, he often followed the name with the sound. His biggest need at this time is in the decoding of CVC words. Is there a base starting point that you use when instructing CVC words? We've worked on word families in the past, and I intend to focus on those the remainder of this school year.
Question for David: Is the ERSI your go-to for literacy assessment? Have you used any others in the past that you found beneficial? I've looking at the Willans Hill website lately to see how they created their literacy program and they use the Basic Reading Inventory by Jerry Johns. I purchased the 10 ed., but have not used it yet. Most (all) of my assessments up to this point have been teacher-made, but I fear the consistency lacks. More (structured) options would be beneficial.
Good for you for trying out the ERSI. A couple of thoughts and my own questions.
• I'm not sure I understand your scoring. How did you get scores with decimal points (e.g., 25.46). If you clarify, I'll help you interpret.
• I'm hoping that while he used Proloquo2go for writing words, you had him spelling letter by letter, not selecting symbols?
• The ERSI, unlike the WTP process we use for conventional reading assessment, is not for identifying greatest need but rather instructional needs. E.g., if a child doesn't consistently demonstrate Concept of Word, we can do more predictable chart writing, use whole word highlighting in digital text reading, and other strategies to help him learn it. I don't actually score anything, but rather look at qualitatively to think about teaching that the student might require.
• I don't teach CVC words as a category. The text I like for beginning word study is Systematic Sequential Phonics They Use, http://tinyurl.com/hm9qkcj, because it uses guided invented spelling of real words, a compare/contrast strategy, and teaches for generalization.
• The ERSI is what I use with emergent kids whom I suspect might be moving toward or ready for conventional literacy instruction, or that I use with beginner beginners to figure out specific instructional needs in word study. The Basic Reading Inventory we use in a different way than the book directs, with our whole to part assessment, but only with conventionally literate kids if we are going to provide them additional instruction targeted at their greatest need in addition to generally good, comprehensive instruction.
I got the results by using the "Calculating Totals" box from your handouts. It was on the sheet that defined the CW, PA, and WR scoring. (i.e. ABC: (a+b+c/78) x 10 = total). Let me know if there's another method I should be using and I'll recalculate and share my results.
When he used the Proloquo2go he used the keyboard only, no symbols. We very rarely use symbols for writing. All our students use either their IPAD keyboard or alphabet charts.
Your explanation during the webinar today made it more clear for the reason we administrate the ERSI. I went into it thinking about identifying needs rather than as a tool to determine instructional needs. Thanks for the clarification.
Thanks for the clarification, as well, about the The Basic Reading Inventory assessment and the beginning word study reference.
Makes sense now, Brad. You followed the teacher directions (or read the article by Morris). I don't add and divide--although, if you have to document growth in struggling kiddos, you certainly could do it this way. What I'd do with your results is be happy that this kiddo knows a little, but not a lot, about all aspects of word knowledge and continue with all the strategies we talked about today and the general emergent literacy instruction (alphabet and phonological awareness, shared reading, predictable charts, independent reading and writing).
Really glad you've got your kids writing with alphabet! Excellent!
Will Do! Thanks!
Dave is motivated by students' learning successes.