Guided Reading

In my time spent at Resurrection, I expanded my knowledge and learned new tools that I

can take with me into my future classroom. During my time I was able to use assessment

information and the nature of texts to develop and revise instruction. I understood the ways in

which foundational skills were integrated in the instruction and how the evidence-based reading

and word work strategies accommodated the needs of students. Working with my first grader

enhanced my skills in these areas, which I can use with my future students to ensure that they are

benefiting from my lesson planning.

I used assessment information throughout my time at Resurrection to determine his

literacy skills. While administering the tests, I could tell that Drew had difficulty with the current

text level I was using. He omitted words, substituted different words in, and did not self-correct.

From there, I went down a text level until I found one that suited Drew. After administering the

tests, I was able to actually go through and analyze it. I found from there that I needed to revise

future instruction to meet his needs. He was not benefiting from the higher level texts because

they were too difficult for him. However, using a text too low would also not benefit him. After

finding out what instructional level he was at, I was able to compare with my fellow peers when

pairing them up. When working with my teacher partner, we chose a text level we thought would

suit both of our students. After the first lesson plan, we decided to go up another text level

because of their accuracy score. However, the next level up text was too difficult for the both of

them. If we were to go back for a third lesson, we would have known from that assessment to go

back down a text level.

Foundational skills were integrated throughout the entire instruction. The skills from the

Iowa core standards we focused on were, knowing applying grade-level phonics and word
analysis skills in decoding words, reading with sufficient accuracy and fluency to support

comprehension, and using illustrations and describing characters, settings, and major events in a

story using key details. While the students were reading, my teacher partner and I focused on

having the students saying the word slowly like when they write it, asking themselves if their

reading makes sense and sounds right, and they can fluently read words together. During the

instruction, we made sure that these foundational skills were integrated so that both students

benefited from our lessons.

The evidence based reading and word work strategies accommodated the needs of the

students by providing them with more experience with different spelling features. When my

teacher partner and I compared our student’s feature guide, we found that they needed more

practice with short vowels and digraphs. For the first lesson we focused on both vowels and

digraphs. Since both students were able to complete the short vowels easily, for the second

lesson we decided to focus more on digraphs. After completing both word work sorts, I feel

confident that they accommodated the needs of the students. For the readings, the students used

different strategies to help them when sounding out tricky words. Since both students would rely

on the illustrations to tell the story, we had them focus on if the sentence made sense and

sounded right. This was an appropriate skill to work on so they could take it with them in their

future reading.

In summary, the spelling assessment allowed me to determine where my student was at

and where I could place him when working with my teacher partner. The planning that took

place, was picking out an appropriate text level book based on all of our assessments. Once we

found a book that fit our students needs we were able to design a lesson plan on what to do

before reading, during reading, and after reading. The instruction overall went well. Before we
read the book and did our picture walk both students were engaged. They made many comments

on the illustrations, and predictions were already starting to brew. When we came across

unfamiliar word text (Clip! Snip!) both students were easily able to identify what made those

words unique. The outcome in general was good. There were some things I would do differently

for future instruction including, not using the word know with the Elkonin box work. It was very

confusing for both students. Also, I wish I would have chosen a different text level book. I

thought that we could move up a level from having the previous week go so well, but the book

was too difficult for both students. However, this experience was a great learning lesson on how

to assess students and form lesson plans that meet their needs based on their assessments.