1. Screening Process - Digging Deeper Instructional Sort
Reviewing Your Selected and Intensive Levels of Support
Screening Process - Digging Deeper Instructional Sort
Our Focus
The Wisconsin RtI Center/Wisconsin PBIS Network (CFDA #84.027) acknowledges the support of the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction in the development of this document and for the continued support of this federally-funded grant program. There are no copyright restrictions on this document; however, please credit the Wisconsin DPI and support of federal funds when copying all or part of this material.

2. Screening Assessments - Not Always Enough
Screening assessments often do not go deep enough in answering the questions:
Why is the student below the expected level?
How far beyond the expected level is the student?
We need to “DIG DEEPER!”
School Level
Groups
Individuals

3. Impact of universal level of support on students
1. School-Level Screening Review:
Do we have a healthy system? School-level team looks at universal screening results
2. School-Level Digging Deeper Review:
What are our universal level instructional strengths?
What are our universal level instructional concerns?
Do we have any underserved groups?
School-level team gather additional information and review at a deeper level
Impact of universal level of support on students
(aggregated and disaggregated)

4. Groups/individuals potentially in need of additional support
1. Grade-Level Screening Review: Groups and Individual Students Department-/Grade-level team looks at screening results
2. Grade-Level Digging Deeper Review:
What are the student’s instructional strengths?
What are the student’s instructional concerns?
School-level team gather additional information and review at a deeper level
Groups/individuals potentially in need of additional support

5. CCSS - Going From Broad to Precise
Universal Reading Screening for ALL Students
Are Students “on Track?”
At Benchmark: Continue High Quality Universal Instruction
Below or Above Benchmark:
Dig Deeper
Concept of Print
Phonological Awareness
Phonics
Fluency
Vocabulary
Comprehension
Fluency> Bridge to Comprehension
CCSS Foundational Skills
Kindergarten -2nd Grade Begin Left to Right
3rd Grade and Higher Begin Right to Left

6. Comprehension Screener Instructional Sort Example
Students Above or Below Benchmark
Dig Deeper
Students Above Benchmark
Additional Data Needed to Articulate Matched Instruction
Students Below Benchmark
Administer Fluency/Accuracy Assessment
Students At Benchmark
Continue Universal Core High Quality Instruction
Gather Additional Information

7. The Instructional Sort Helps Us:1
Know if there is an area that needs universal whole group attention.
Determine if a large percentage of students have a similar need/s. 2
Guide differentiation within the universal level for whole group, small group, and individual students.
Determine when the instructional need is more intense. 3
Provide matched intervention grouping.
Data for

8. Dig Deeper - Systemic and Systematic Screening Process
Data
Is the student above or below the screening benchmark?
If so, dig deeper
Review
What is the reading concern?
Did you validate the problem using additional data?
Do you have precision information to articulate matched additional supports?
Instructional Sort: Administer oral fluency assessment/s with students who are below the benchmark. Sort student names in the quadrant that aligns with the student’s baseline/median results.
Administer assessments with no grade level ceiling for students above the benchmark and determine matched instruction.
Process
Refer to the Instructional Sort and analyze data at the building, group, and student levels.
Determine ambitious goals so student/s will meet or exceed end of the year benchmarks.
Define additional instruction and intensity level.

9. Why is Fluency So Important?
“…fluency is an essential element that bridges the gap between word recognition and comprehension.” Vaughn and Linan-Thompson
What does this translate to…
Students’ struggles with comprehension skills may be a result of deficits in any of the foundation skills and/or deficits in comprehension strategies.
So we need to have a systemic and systematic process to analyze why students are not proficient and make an instructional match within a culturally responsive multi-level system of support.

10. Tim 60 wcpm 80% Rickie 85 wcpm 97% Janelle 82 wcpm 85% Mike 62 wcpm
Next Step: Administer Oral Fluency Assessment for Students Who Performed Below the Benchmark on the Comprehension Screener
3rd Grade Class- Fall
Fall Benchmark ORF=> 70 Fall Accuracy =>95%
Student
Words Correct per Minute
Accuracy
Tim
60 wcpm
80%
Rickie
85 wcpm
97%
Janelle
82 wcpm
85%
Mike
62 wcpm
98%
Chris
163 wcpm
Lainie
67 wcpm
100%
02/06/08

11. Next Step: Sort Your Data and Identify Student Instructional Need/s
and Dig Even Deeper
Remember: Teams should analyze data at school, groups, and student level
Instructional Sort
Accurate and Fluent
Group 1-Instructional Focus
*Comprehension
*Vocabulary
Rickie, Chris
Accurate but Slow Rate
Group 2-Instructional Focus
*Fluency
Lainie, Mike
Inaccurate and Slow Rate
Group 3-Instructional Focus
*Phonological Awareness
*Phonics
*Word Recognition
*Multi-syllabication
Tim
Inaccurate but High Rate
Group 4-Instructional Focus
*Multiple possible reasons:
lacks self-monitoring, accuracy, does not adjust pacing, ignores punctuation marks
Janelle
Howell, cited by Harken and Fay

12. Why is Rickie performing below the benchmark on the comprehension screener? Find root cause.
1.) Can rule out fluency as a barrier. 2.) Focus on digging deeper in the instructional areas of comprehension/vocabulary.
Group 1- Rickie
Sample Instructional Plan:
Instructional Sort
Group 1: Accurate and Fluent
Rickie
Chris
Group 2:
Accurate but Slow Rate
Lainie Mike
Group 3:
Inaccurate and Slow Rate
Tim
Group 4:
Inaccurate but High Rate
Janelle
Instruction on monitoring for meaning
Instruction on determining main ideas
Instruction on fix-up strategies
Instruction on *tier 2 academic vocabulary and vocabulary learning strategies
*Beck, McKowan and Kucan(2002)
Howell, cited by Harken and Fay

13. Why is Lainie performing below the benchmark? Find root cause.
1. Based on the data, we can hypothesize that Lainie is a word-for word reader. Her lack of automaticity is a having an impact on her comprehension.
Instructional Sort
Group 1: Accura te and Fluent
Chris
Rickie
Group 2:
Accurate but Slow Rate
Lainie Mike
Group 3:
Inaccurate and Slow Rate
Tim
Group 4:
Inaccurate but High Rate
Janelle
Group 2- Lainie
Sample Instructional Plan:
Instruction on automaticity at Lainie’s appropriate level: data indicates Lainie is at the sentence level
Do not ignore making meaning of text
Repeated and assisted reading >move to passage level as data indicates
Instruction on grouping words to make meaning, adjust pacing, and attention to punctuation
Use both narrative and informational texts
Instruct using a comprehension focus.
Howell, cited by Harken and Fay

14. Phonological Word Recognition Basic Decoding Multi-syllabication
Why is Tim performing below the screening benchmark? Find root cause.
We can hypothesize Tim is not comprehending text because he is not able to decode words with automaticity. What are the prerequisite skills that are preventing Tim from reading fluently and accurately ?
May need additional information/assessments to identify specific needs such as: Running Records with Miscue(Error) Analysis - Gather miscue samples at student instructional level and look for common themes
Digging Deeper: Group 3 - Tim
Instructional Sort
Group 1: Accurate and Fluent
Chris Rickie
Group 2:
Accurate but Slow Rate
Lainie Mike
Group 3:
Inaccurate and Slow Rate
Tim
Group 4:
Inaccurate but High Rate
Janelle
Phonological
Word Recognition
Basic Decoding
Multi-syllabication
Howell, cited by Harken and Fay

15. Digging Even Deeper - Match Instruction to Student Need
Group 3-Tim
Sample Instructional Plan:
Instructional Sort
Group 1: Accurate and Fluent
Chris
Group 2:
Accurate but Slow Rate
Lainie Mike
Group 3:
Inaccurate and Slow Rate
Tim
Group 4:
Inaccurate but High Rate
Janelle
Instruction on missing decoding skills.
Instruction on word recognition.
Work on applying skills to connected text at instructional level.
Work on fluent reading at independent level.
Howell, cited by Harken and Fay

16. Group 4 - Inaccurate but High Rate - Janelle
Find Root Cause - Could be due to Multiple Reasons
May need instructional emphasis on monitoring for meaning
May need to teach student to adjust rate of reading to type of text and purpose for reading
May be inserting or deleting words (particularly function words such as: a, the), dropping endings, etc.
May need to cue student when she makes an error to create awareness of the inaccuracy: assisted self- monitoring

17. Organizing Your Data to Match Student Need
Instructional Sort
Group 1: Accurate and Fluent
Chris
Group 2:
Accurate but Slow Rate
Lainie Mike
Group 3:
Inaccurate and Slow Rate
Tim
Group 4:
Inaccurate but High Rate
Janelle
Group 4- Janelle
Sample Instructional Plan:
Cue student when student makes an error to create awareness of the inaccurate error: assisted self-monitoring
Teach student to apply self- monitoring strategies
Set goal: Challenge student to read a portion of the text with 2 or fewer errors
Teach student to adjust rate of reading to type of text and purpose for reading
References
CBE materials
Howell & Nolet, 2000
Howell, cited by Harken and Fay

18. Need to Consider Both Quantitative Changes Qualitative Changes
Smaller group size
More time
Longer duration
Greater frequency
Qualitative Changes
Specific instructional foci
More practice opportunities
Type of adult feedback
Arrangement of setting to reduce distractions

19. Be Mindful of the Stages in the Skill Development Model of Learning
Newly Taught Skill or
Strategy
Learn it With Accuracy
Practice for Fluency/
Automaticity
Keep Practicing for Maintenance
Now Can Make Generalizations
Adapt/ Apply to New Situations
Adapted from : Haring and Eaton Instructional Hierarchy-(1978)
David Howe (2006)

20. *Phonological Awareness Letter Recognition Letter/Sounds Phonics
A Systemic and Systematic Digging Deeper Instructional Sort Process Works Across CCSS Standards
Concept of Print
*Phonological Awareness
Letter Recognition
Letter/Sounds
Phonics
* For another example, see Phonological Instructional Sort PPT