This assignment will consist of my explanation of the LNF, LSF, PSF, and NWF assessments, the facts of the

test results of Ms. Keetow's class, and my interpretation of the data, and how I would group the students based on the test scores. Lastly, I will discuss what additional information I could use to supplement my instruction, and grouping, and a final reflection on the assignment. The assessments that Ms. Keetow used were; Letter Name Fluency(LNF), Letter Sound Fluency(LSF), Phoneme Segmentation Fluency(PSF), and Nonsense Word Fluency(NWF) assessments. Letter Naming Fluency assessments are primarily used in kindergarten and 1st grade to measure the fluency a student has when it comes to recognizing and naming individual letters. The assessment lasts 60 seconds, and requires students to name as many letters as they can off of a list and they are given points for how many they got correct. Letter Sound Fluency assessments are used in kindergarten to measure a student's ability to recognize and accurately produce sounds of letters. LSF assessments require students to determine which picture corresponds with the sound the teacher is making. Each response should take no more than 5 seconds and scoring is based off of how many correct responses are given within 60 seconds. Phoneme Segmentation Fluency assessments test students from mid-year kindergarten through 1st and 2nd grade on their ability to separate each letter sound in a word. PSF assessments require students to tell the instructor all of the sounds in each word from a list of words. Points are assigned based on the total number of correct sounds were made within 60 seconds. Nonsense Word Fluency tests are also used on mid-year kindergarten through 1st and 2nd grade students, and they assess the student's ability to use their knowledge of letters and sounds to decode word pronunciations. This last assessment involves a list of make-believe words, and requires the students to attempt to read as many of the words on the list as possible in a 60 second time frame. Points are given based on how many nonsense words the student was able to decipher. All three of these assessments involve timing the response time of each individual student so all of them are traditionally given to a student individually, face-to-face while the teacher records the results. According to the test results, the majority of Ms. Keetow's class got average and above average

scores on each of the four assessments. Whatever Ms. Keetow is doing to teach her students their letters and phonics is working because only one student out of the fifteen isn't meeting expectations, and that is a feat all by itself. Usually scores on a test follow the standard bell curve where the majority of the scores fall in the middle and there are few outliers in the top percentage and the bottom; but in Ms. Keetow's class the majority of the scores were either close to the middle or in the top percentile. Based off of the scores in the Fall Assessments chart, half or more than half of the students are scoring above the 75%ile in each test. Only one or two students scored below the 50%ile in each test, and only one had scores that were all below average. Overall, the scores in the chart reflect a good reading curriculum in place in Ms. Keetow's class and with a little more reinforcement on the basics (LNF & LSF), all of her students could meet expectations. I used the Letter Sound Fluency assessment to determine the instructional grouping of my students. I chose this assessment because it ties in with all of the other assessments, and the results show how good of a foundation each student has in their reading skills. Since LSF is such a basic skill, I would put students into groups of two, which leaves one student to be paired with me for one-on-one attention. The scores on the LSF assessments were all very close together so grouping in pairs helps to thoroughly separate the students with different levels of understanding. I would pair off the students starting with the two with the highest scores, and keep going down the list of scores until the person with the lowest score, in this case Paige, is left to be paired with me for extra help. Below is a table showing how I would group the members of each pair group, their respective scores on the LSF assessment, and the associated skill group level. Group Members Paige & Instructor Milo & Barbie Betty & Rusty Candi & Rick Robin & Al 9 77 & 56 43 & 42 41 & 41 31 & 40 Test Scores Group Level Well Below Average Well Above Average Above Average Above Average Average

Ella & Anna Ann & Harrison Neil & Scott

31 & 31 30 & 30 26 & 29

Average Average Below Average

I chose these groups because keeping students paired up with other students who got scores similar to each other helps keep Skill Group Levels together, which in turn helps me choose how to instruct each group, and what to expect of them. Paige received the lowest scores on the assessment and is the odd student out in a class of 15 so I would choose to help her one-on-one for group one. Milo and Barbie have the highest scores and they are 10 points or more than the rest so they are well above the class average in group two. Betty, Rusty, Candi, and Rick all got scores in the 41-43 range which is a little above the class average of 35 so they comprise the above average groups three and four. Robin, Al, Ella, Anna, Ann, and Harrison all got average scores, so they make up the average skill group level groups five, six, and seven. The last group is Neil and Scott who received scores below the class average so they are classified group eight, below average skill level.

Additional information on each of my lowest and highest scoring students would definitely help me work more effectively with them. Making sure I have their scores handy for the other assessments, especially Letter Naming Fluency, and Nonsense Word Fluency would help me better understand their grip on the concept. LNF results would show the very basic knowledge of letters, and NWF would show the complex level of understanding of letters and phonics for each student. Knowing where each student stands between the levels of basic and complex levels of understanding would help me target certain concepts that each group needs work with. Knowing the communication level of each student is very important as well, knowing this would help me be aware of which groups might need more guidance in activities and which groups I can leave to work independently with the trust that they will be able to accomplish the tasks I give them.

My experience in this assignment analyzing data to create instructional groups required a little more time and knowledge than I had initially thought it would. Looking at each and every student's score in relation to their classmates, and the expectations, then grouping them based off of their scores was a process that wasn't quickly done, but I believe it is necessary to take the time to rationalize why you group certain students together in order to cultivate the best learning environment for all of them. I feel that assessment, and the analyzing of the results is one of the most important steps to putting together lesson and unit plans. It gives you the information you need to know to help you determine as an instructor, what things to re-teach a different way, reinforce, at what pace to teach certain concepts at, and which students tend to get it, and not get it right away. After doing this assignment, I feel more confident in myself to be able to create instructional groups based off of individual assessment scores.