Determining Comprehension of Readers Name:

Is always making sense of the text as opposed to simply decoding words. Meaningful reading instead of word by word reading. Understands the goal for reading and taps into the prior knowledge needed. Makes connections, predictions and or draws inferences in reading passages. Understands the important information in reading passages. Self corrects, re-reads when necessary to enhance understanding. Stops periodically to ensure understanding or uses some reflective thought. Reads for enjoyment or to discover something. Demonstrates a positive attitude toward reading. A weaker reader isnt persistent and will often require a great deal of prompting.

Date: Limited Satisfactory Thorough

Making Connections (Prior Knowledge)

Makes no connections between text and background knowledge

Makes simple connections but cannot explain them, or the connections are irrelevant to the text

Questioning Asks only literal questions Asks only literal Questioning questions

Relates background knowledge/ experience to text and expands the interpretations of text by using schema; may discuss schema related to author, text structure; Asks questions to deepen the meaning of text; may explain how the questions enhance comprehension (metacognition) Identifies some elements as more important to text meaning

Explains how schema enriches interpretation of text and begins to make connections beyond life experience and immediate text

Uses questions to challenge the text (author's purpose, theme, or point of view) Identifies at least one key concept, idea, or theme as important in overall text meaning and clearly explains why Develops predictions, interpretations, and/or conclusions about the text that include connections between the text and the reader's background knowledge or ideas and beliefs

Determining Importance

Guesses randomly or inaccurately attempts to identify important elements

Identifies some elements as more important to text meaning

Inferring

Attempts to make predictions or draw conclusions, without using the text or by using the text inappropriately to defend the statement

Draws conclusions or makes predictions that are consistent with the text or schema

Draws conclusions and/or makes predictions and can explain the source of the conclusion or prediction

3 The written response is complete. It indicates a very good understanding of the story and its problem, and provides accurate, and relevant details, information, and supportive reasoning. 2 The response is partial and indicates a fairly good understanding of the story. Although the information selected includes mostly accurate details and ideas, some may be irrelevant or unrelated to the story's problem. 1 The response is fragmentary and indicates only minimal understanding of the story's problem. It includes mainly random details and irrelevant information. 0 There is little or no response. Inaccurate and irrelevant details and ideas indicate a serious misunderstanding of the story.