Using Assessment Data to Inform Instruction
This summer, we have been sharing the key actions from Connecticut’s K-3 Literacy Strategy that are necessary to attain the goal of all children reading at or above grade level independently and proficiently by the end of third grade. These actions include:
- building a sustainable literacy leadership team;
- selecting and implementing a comprehensive K-3 reading curriculum;
- securing common planning opportunities among teachers and coaches;
- shifting mindsets and practices to evidence-aligned instructional strategies rooted in the Science of Reading; and
- empowering teachers with ongoing coaching and opportunities for collaboration through professional learning communities.
Another critical piece of Connecticut’s K-3 Literacy Strategy highlights the use of evidence-aligned sensible assessment practices. This includes using formative and summative assessments that are part of the comprehensive reading curriculum to inform daily instruction and performance over time on grade-level standards. Additionally, CT-approved research-based universal screening reading assessments should be administered on a regular basis (i.e., fall, winter, spring) to assist in the identification of those experiencing reading difficulties and for progress monitoring. These assessment results, when combined with other sources of student-specific data, should be linked with student learning goals to maximize overall student growth.
See how CT educators are intentionally connecting assessment data with instruction to inform their next steps:
“Our Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction, Darryl Rouillard, analyzed our performance data and he identified that our approach was not working. When you see our data in our charts, you can see that clearly we had an issue, and what we had been doing was not working the way we needed it to. This data analysis prompted us to do an in-depth literacy review… we shifted away from TC and Balanced Literacy and revised our ELA curriculum. As we did so, we embraced the Science of Reading approach and research-based programs and assessments.”
“I’ll do a direct correlation that after Year One of implementation of Wonders, we did have two schools in our district become Schools of Distinction for performance and also growth within literacy instruction. And I think that's important.”
“Whole group, small group, and independent practice are based on students’ individual needs. Hill Central students qualifying for intervention are moved out of intervention quickly. They find the gap, they close the gap, and then they move on.”
“We have a strong SRBI system in place; however, the [diagnostic] decision tree is not as streamlined as we need it to be. I believe this [Right to Read professional learning session with HILL for Literacy] helped us all to reflect on where and how we could improve our practice and strengthen our supports more. We also identified additional measures we should be looking into to gain more data and insight on our students' abilities.”
“I really enjoyed the discussion around the Continuum of Reading Skills and mapping it to specific DIBELS assessments. I think that this will help teachers understand the why in each assessment and then how to intervene when necessary.”
“Our data this year shows excellent growth towards meeting and exceeding students’ individual goals… Next year, we will use this data that we have collected to target specific areas and we will continue to meet monthly to reflect on student growth.”
“We know there is no one perfect program. The Science of Reading is not a pendulum swing. It is the knowledge that informs our decisions to do the best we possibly can for all students while continuing to build teacher capacity around essential components. Our data confirms it is more about teacher pedagogy than a program. We still have some more to do to get to our goal of at least 95% of students meeting benchmark, but we are proud of the work we’ve done so far.”