Post- Assessment Analysis/ Reflection Over all the students improved on the amount of sight words they knew

when we tested on April 23rd, 2013 compared to the amount of sight words the students were able to recognize when they were tested in November of 2012. Jaz knew 23 out of the 40 sight words resulting in recognizing 57 percent of the sight words. Jaz tried to wound out many of the sight words that she did not know, but would give up on the word after sounding out the first few letters. Nate successfully recognized 32 out of the 40 sight words when he was tested, which lead to knowing 80 percent of the Dolch Pre-Primer sight words. There were a few sight words that Nate skipped over without attempting to give an answer; however, Nate gave an answer for most of the sight words even if it was the incorrect word. Jacob knew 33 out of the 40 sight words, which resulted in him recognizing approximately 82 percent of the sight words that he was test on. Jacob attempted to sound out the words he did not automatically know resulting in Jacob giving an answer for all of the words on the page. The students as a whole excelled in letter recognition. Jacob identified and gave the appropriate letter sound for all the capital and lower case letters except for the lowercase q. Jacob gave no response to the lowercase q, he simply skipped over it after viewing it for a few seconds. Nate knew all of his long and short vowel sounds and was able to recognize all of the capital letters. Nate recognized all of the lowercase letters with the exception of the letter q. Nate said that the lowercase letter q was the letter p. Jaz was able to state the sounds of ever letter; however, she was unable to remember what the short sound for the letters o and a were.

Jaz was able to identify all of the capital letters and identified 24 out of the 26 lowercase letters. Jaz identified the lowercase letter l as i and the lowercase q as p. All three of the students were motivated when it came to the spelling test. The students were unable to correctly spell many of the words, but the students finished the spelling test and wanted to do more. Jacob spelled ten out of the twenty-six words correctly. Jacob has mastered the emergent and letter namealphabetic stages in phonics. Jacob is currently needing instruction in the early and middle stages of within word patters. While Jacob was able to use some of the word patterns, he confused them. Jacob needs careful instruction for the within word pattern and syllables and affixes stages. Nate spelled four out of the twenty-six words correctly. Nate could use some review in the final consonant and the short vowel areas of phonic instruction. Nate needs careful instruction in the late letter name-alphabetic stage, the within word stages, and the syllables and affixes stages. Nate is currently in the middle to late stages of letter name-alphabetic. Jaz spelled nine out of the twenty-six words correctly. Jaz is between the middle stage of letter name- alphabetic and early stage of within word patterns. Jaz needs careful instruction with digraphs, common long vowels, and all of the components in the stages of syllable and affixes. Jaz should have some review in with the blends as well. Jaz has improved with her phonological awareness testing that was done in April of 2013 compared to the testing that was done in November of 2012. In November of 2012, Jaz completed the rhyme recognition, syllable deletion, phoneme isolation of initial sounds, phoneme isolation of final sounds, and phoneme blending,

phoneme segmentation. When Jaz was tested in April of 2013, she was able to master the concept of spoken word, rhyme production, syllable blending, and syllable segmentation in phonological awareness. Jaz scored a four out of six in the areas of phoneme deletion of initial sounds and phoneme deletion of final sounds, which resulted in the ending of the testing. Jaz did not move on to attempt the phoneme deletion of fist sound in consonant blends or the phoneme substitution. In November of 2013, Nate completed the concept of spoken word, rhyme recognition, syllable blending, phoneme isolation of initial sounds, phoneme segmentation, and phoneme substitution. When Nate was tested in April of 2013, he was able to complete the rhyme production, syllable segmentation, syllable deletion, phoneme blending, phoneme deletion of initial sounds, and phoneme deletion of final sounds. Nate was tested on the phoneme deletion of the first sound in consonant blends and scored a one out of six. Nate improved a considerable amount in the testing that was done in April of 2013 compared to the testing that was done in November of 2012. The phoneme deletion of the fist sound in consonant blends was the only phonological awareness skill test that Nate did not pass. When Jacob was tested on his phonological skills test in November of 2012, he mastered the concept of spoken word, rhyme recognition, syllable blending, syllable segmentation, syllable deletion, phoneme isolation of initial sounds, phoneme isolation of final sounds, phoneme blending, and phoneme segmentation. Jacob improved since that testing. In April of 2013, Jacob passed the phoneme deletion of initial sounds, phoneme deletion of final sounds, phoneme deletion of first sound in consonant blends, and phoneme

substitution. Jacob has mastered all of the concepts in the phonological awareness skills test, or the PAST. Over all the students were able to read the stories that were provided to them, but they struggled with comprehension of the story. Nate read at level B. Nate had an accuracy rate of an 89 percent, which is right below the independent level of reading. Nate had a self-correction ratio of one to three. When Nate had an error he said an incorrect word that looked similar to the correct word, but the words did not have the same meaning. Nate understood that the dog and the girl were playing throughout the story, but he did not give any specific examples except for playing Frisbee, which they did not do in the story. When I asked Nate if this story reminded him of anything he said no, which means he did not make a personal connection to the story. Nate did read the story fairly fluently with a few pauses in places and sounding out some of the words. When Nate came to a word he did not know, he quickly replaced the word with his own word or skipped it. Nate used great voice when he was reading the story. Jaz read at a level C and read at an accuracy rate of 94 percent. Jaz did not correct herself throughout the story so her self-correction ratio is one to zero. When Jaz replaced the correct word with an incorrect word, she often did not use a word that had the same meaning, but it had the same structure and visual ques. Jaz understood the main idea of the story, but neglected to remember the details. Jaz was pretty fluent when she read. She did not pause often or stop to sound out many words. Jacob read a book at level F. Jacob read at an accuracy rate of 92 percent. Jacob had a self-correction ratio of one to four. Jacob used great voice when he read and read many words together without pausing. This

group of students could benefit the implication of the standards RL.K.1, RL.K.2., RF.K.2, RF.K.3, and L.K.1 in their instruction. There were a few behavioral issues that got in the way of teaching the students. The largest issue was getting off topic. The students loved to tell long, detailed stories. When a student would begin to tell a story I was simply tell them that they should remember their story and tell me all about it at the end of our session. A few of the students also had an issue with sitting correctly. One of my boys could not sit properly in his chair and often times asked if he could stand instead of sitting. I told him that he could stand, but he had to be engaged in our work. When we sat on the ground I would have the students pick a spot to sit. I then told the students that they were glued to that spot. If the students started to wiggle I would ask them if they needed more glue and they knew what that meant. With all the different groups, it got really loud. There is not a whole lot we could do about the noise level, but I tried to use an expressive voice to keep the attention of my students. The students also liked to watch what the other groups were doing instead of focusing on our groups project. To help with distractions, I sat against the wall in the hallway and had the students face me. This way the students only looked at the wall and I. At the start of the semester, the students and I came up with group rules. Everyday before we would start the activities we would review our rules. I would also have the rules on display throughout the whole period and if there were problems, I would simply point to the rules chart. At the end of every session I would read a fun book to the students and allow them to share their stories. This was a reward for the students behavior. The students loved the No David books.

To keep all of the students engaged, I have multiple activities that were hands-on. The students loved to act out the story and draw pictures of the story. For sight words we made the sight word hop where the students could choose three out of the ten sight words and hop on them as they said them. This was a great way to incorporate differentiated learning. When we read books I had one student at a time be the pointer. This kept the attention of the students and worked on directionality. If the students were moving slow when it came to writing or coloring I reminded them that they needed to do their best work and stay on task so we could have time to read their book of choice at the end. I found that the students really enjoyed reading books that they recognized because they could chime in on phrases that they knew. The interest inventory really helped me discover what my students enjoyed. It helped me when I was putting their books together to know what colors they liked and it helped me when I was picking out books. I tried to get at least one book that was about the students favorite animal or character. When I got stickers I tried to get stickers that had characters or items that the student said they liked, which made the students really motivated and excited. The interest inventory also gave me an understanding of what they may understand or may not understand when it came to general concepts. Two of the students gave me detailed lists throughout the interest inventory and one was very vague. I found that the two who gave me a detailed list understood many of vocabulary words that the other student did not. The students are similar as far as their level of phonics is concerned; however, they need very different instruction. One of my students is at a much

higher reading level while my other two students are at a lower reading level. One of my students needs a lot of help in the area of writing and forming letters, but they excel in reading, while my other students can form letters great, but need a little extra help in reading fluently. All of the students could use some instruction in spelling. Two of my students loved to act out the stories and move around a lot, yet one of my students did not like to do anything that involved dancing, but they all liked the activities that were hands on. The students also loved it when we made books, even though a few of them did not always want to write them. One of the students did not like to color or drawl while one of the other students took his time coloring. This made it challenging when I was planning my instruction because I knew I would have to have something for the early finishers to do that would not get them ahead of the later finishing students. I also had to find away to hurry the student who took their time along without rushing and creating poor work. I also learned that you have to plan for your transitions. If you are not organized and have every minute planned for, the students will get off task and they may start breaking some of the rules. It surprised me when my students started asking me everyday if we would get to read No David, I thought it was amazing that the students rather read a book as a reward them get candy everyday. The students never asked me if they were going to get candy, yet they seemed to still be motivated.