1. DIBELS TM : Overview and Use Good, R. H., & Kaminski, R. A. (Eds.). (2002). Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement. Available: http://dibels.uoregon.edu/. Funded through the Centers for Implementing K-3 Behavior and Reading Intervention Models Preventing Reading Difficulties: A Three-Tiered Intervention Model U.S. Department of Education grant contract number H324X010013 Principal Investigator: Sharon Vaughn, Ph. D. Co-Principal Investigators: Sylvia Linan-Thompson, Ph. D. and Batya Elbaum, Ph. D.

2. DIBELS TM : Overview and Use Kim Rodriguez & Thea Woodruff University of Texas Center for Reading and Language Arts Good, R. H., & Kaminski, R. A. (Eds.). (2002). Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement. Available: http://dibels.uoregon.edu/.

3. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Objectives Learn how to administer select DIBELS TM measures for screening and progress monitoring. Learn how to use DIBELS TM to inform instruction.

4. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Early Childhood Research Institute on Measuring Growth and Development Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement University of Oregon, College of Education Oregon Department of Education Assessment of Big Ideas in Beginning Reading DIBELS TM Benchmark Assessment

5. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski What are the DIBELS ™? Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills™ Brief, standardized, individually administered measures Assess development of pre-reading and early reading skills Correspond to the 5 critical elements of reading instruction

6. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski What are the DIBELS ™? Each measure assesses accuracy and fluency The measures are predictive of later reading proficiency Multiple forms make DIBELS™ a useful tool for frequent progress monitoring

7. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Assessment Type: Subskill Mastery Advantages Monitors student growth on specific skills Closely linked with curriculum Helps monitor toward short-term objectives Example Assessments included in reading curriculum

8. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Assessment Type: General Outcome Measure Advantages Curriculum independent Measures student growth towards long-term outcomes Good technical adequacy data Assesses for retention and generalization Example DIBELS TM

9. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski DIBELS TM Measures Today’s measures Letter Naming Fluency (LNF) K-1 Oral Reading Fluency (DORF) 1-3

10. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski DIBELS TM Measures Additional measures Initial Sound Fluency (ISF) PK-K Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF) K-1 Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF) K-2 Word Use Fluency (WUF) PK-3 Oral Retell Fluency (RTF) 1-3 Spanish versions for K-3 Website: http://dibels.uoregon.edu/

11. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski The DIBELS TM

12. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski BIG IDEAS in Early Literacy Skills Phonemic Awareness.  The awareness and understanding of the sound structure of our language, that “cat” is composed of the sounds /k/ /a/ /t/. Phonics or Alphabetic Principle. Based on two parts:  Alphabetic Understanding. Words are composed of letters that represent sounds, and  Phonological Recoding. Using systematic relationships between letters and phonemes (letter-sound correspondence) to retrieve the pronunciation of an unknown printed string or to spell. Accuracy and Fluency with Connected Text.  Readers who are not fluent at decoding are not able to focus their attentional resources on comprehension. National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

13. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Big Ideas and DIBELS TM Big ideas of early literacy should drive the curriculum and instruction. And, Big ideas should drive the measures we use.

14. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski General Instructions Each section is a one-minute, timed measure. Read scripted directions. You will need: DIBELS TM 6th Edition Administration and Scoring Manual Student stimulus packet Timer Clipboard Colored Pen

15. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski DIBELS TM Letter Naming Fluency (LNF) Kaminski, R. A., & Good, R. H. (2002). Letter Naming Fluency. In R. H. Good & R. A. Kaminski (Eds.), Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement. Available: http://dibels.uoregon.edu/. Prior editions were supported, in part, by the Early Childhood Research Institute on Measuring Growth and Development (H180M10006) and Student-Initiated Grant (H023B90057) funded by the U. S. Department of Education, Special Education Programs.

16. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Letter Knowledge ( measured by Letter Naming Fluency ) Accuracy of naming letters Fluency in naming letters

17. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Materials Student copy of LNF probe Examiner copy of LNF probe Timer Colored pen

18. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski LNF Probes Each probe is a random sort of 2 lower case and 2 upper case alphabets. Lines help students to keep their place.

19. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Directions 1. Place the student copy of randomized alphabets in front of the student. 2. Place the examiner copy of randomized alphabets in front of you on the clipboard, but shielded so that the student cannot see what you record. 3. Say these specific directions to the student: Here are some letters (point). Tell me the names of as many letters as you can. When I say “begin,” start here (point to first letter), and go across the page (point). Point to each letter and tell me the name of that letter. If you come to a letter you don’t know I’ll tell it to you. Put your finger on the first letter. Ready, begin.

20. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Directions 4. Start your stop watch after saying “Ready, begin.” If the student fails to say the first letter after 3 seconds, tell him/her the letter and mark it as incorrect. 5. Follow along on your copy. Put a slash (/) through letters named incorrectly.

21. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Directions 6. If a student stops or struggles with a letter for 3 seconds, tell the student the letter and mark it as incorrect. Prompt the student by pointing to the next letter and saying, “What letter?” (if necessary). 7. At the end of 1 minute, place a bracket (]) after the last letter named and say, "Stop." 36

22. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Scoring Directions 1. Put a slash (/) through letters omitted or named incorrectly. 2. The following responses should be counted as errors: a. The student substitutes a different letter for the stimulus letter, e.g., the student says "B" for "D". b. The student stops or struggles with a letter for 3 seconds. c. The student omits a letter.

23. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Articulation and Dialect Articulation and Dialect. The student is not penalized for imperfect pronunciation due to dialect, articulation, or second language interference. For example, if the student consistently says /th/ for /s/ and pronounces "thee" for "see" when naming the letter "C", he or she should be given credit for correct letter naming. This is a professional judgment and should be based on the student's responses and any prior knowledge of his/her speech patterns.

24. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Scoring Notes If a student skips an entire row, draw a line through the row and do not count the row as correct. Upper case letter “i” and lower case letter “L” are hard to differentiate. A response of either “i” or “L” is scored as correct. If a student makes an error and corrects him/herself within 3 seconds, write "SC" above the letter and do not count it as an error.

25. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Time to Practice!

26. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski DIBELS TM Oral Reading Fluency (DORF) Good, R. H., & Kaminski, R. A., & Dill, S. (2002). DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency. In R. H. Good & R. A. Kaminski (Eds.), Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement. Available: http://dibels.uoregon.edu/.

27. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Oral Reading Fluency Develop irregular words and sight words Improve decoding skills Build fluent reading of text Activate and build prior knowledge Develop comprehension strategies

28. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Materials Student copy of passage Examiner copy Clipboard Timer Colored pen

29. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Directions for Administration 1. Place the reading passage in front of the student. 2. Place the examiner copy on clipboard and position so that the student cannot see what you record.

30. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Directions 3. Say these specific directions to the student: Please read this (point) out loud. If you get stuck, I will tell you the word so you can keep reading. When I say, “stop” I may ask you to tell me about what you read, so do your best reading. Start here (point to the first word of the passage). Begin. © 2001 Good & Kaminski Page 6

31. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Timing 4. Start your stopwatch when the student says the first word of the passage. The title is not counted. If the student fails to say the first word after 3 seconds, tell them the word and mark it as incorrect, then start your stopwatch. 5. The maximum time for each word is 3 seconds. If the student does not provide the word within 3 seconds, say the word and mark the word as incorrect. 6.At the end of 1 minute, place a bracket ( ] ) after the last word provided by the student and say “Stop.” Record the total number of words read correctly on the bottom of the scoring sheet.

32. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Scoring 7. Follow along on the examiner copy of the probe. Put a slash ( ) over words read incorrectly. 8. Score reading passages immediately after administration.

33. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Directions for Scoring 1.Hesitate or struggle with words. If a student hesitates or struggles with a word for 3 seconds, tell the student the word and mark the word as incorrect. If necessary, indicate for the student to continue with the next word.

34. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Hyphenated Words 2. Hyphenated words. Hyphenated words count as two words if both parts can stand alone as individual words. Hyphenated words count as one word if either part cannot stand alone as an individual word.

35. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Numerals 3. Numerals. Numerals must be read correctly in the context of the sentence.

36. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Mispronounced Words 4. Mispronounced words. A word is scored as correct if it is pronounced correctly in the context of the sentence. If the word is mispronounced in the context, it is scored as an error.

37. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Self Corrections 5. Self Corrections. A word is scored as correct if it is initially mispronounced but the student self corrects within 3 seconds. Mark SC above the word and score as correct. SC

38. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Repeated Words 6. Repeated Words. Words that are repeated are not scored as incorrect and are ignored in scoring.

39. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Articulation and Dialect 7. Articulation and dialect. The student is not penalized for imperfect pronunciation due to dialect, articulation, or second language interference. For example, if the student consistently says /th/ for /s/, and reads “rest” as “retht,” he or she should be given credit for a correct word. This is a professional judgment and should be based on the student’s responses and any prior knowledge of his/her speech patterns.

40. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Inserted Words 8. Inserted words. Inserted words are ignored and not counted as errors. The student also does not get additional credit for inserted words. If the student frequently inserts extra words, note the pattern at the bottom of the scoring page.

41. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Omitted Words 9. Omitted words. Omitted words are scored as incorrect.

42. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Word Order 10. Word Order. All words that are read correctly but in the wrong order are scored as incorrect.

43. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Abbreviations 11. Abbreviations. Abbreviations should be read in the way you would normally pronounce the abbreviation in conversation. For example, TV could be read as “teevee” or “television” but Mr. would be read as “mister.”

44. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Skipped Text If a student skips a line of text, draw a line through the skipped text and do not count the skipped text in scoring.

45. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski DORF Score The score is the median (or middle) score when three passages are administered for screening purposes. During progress monitoring, only one passage is administered.

46. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Time to Practice!

47. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Acknowledgements Centers for Implementing K-3 Behavior and Reading Intervention Models Preventing Reading Difficulties: A Three-Tiered Intervention Model U.S. Department of Education grant contract number H324X010013 Principal Investigator: Sharon Vaughn, Ph. D. Co-Principal Investigators: Sylvia Linan-Thompson, Ph. D. and Batya Elbaum, Ph. D.

48. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Different Levels of Use State level District level School level Classroom level Individual student level

49. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Classroom Level Screening Progress Monitoring

50. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Screening Conduct screening assessments 3 times per year in first grade and above (beginning, middle, and end of the year) Conduct screening assessments 2 times per year in kindergarten (middle and end of the year) Assess all students on appropriate measures Examine students’ scores in relationship to established goals Use to help inform both whole group and small group instruction

51. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Initial Screening: DIBELS TM Goals

52. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Screening: Kindergarten Example

53. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Using Data to Inform Instruction Examine class as a whole to inform whole group instruction Examine groups of students to inform small group instruction

54. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Whole Class Instruction: Kindergarten Example 80% of the students in this class met the goal of naming 27 letters or more in one minute Tier 1 (core) instruction in this area is meeting its goal 40% of the students met the goal of segmenting 18 sounds or more in one minute Tier 1 instruction in this area is NOT meeting its goal

55. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Small Group Instruction: Kindergarten Example Small group to help the 20% in letter naming:  Chris, Edwin, Matt Small groups to help the 60% in phonological awareness:  Chris, Edwin, Leta  William, Tyson, Edna, Matt  Essence, Tashaun, Delia

56. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Screening: First Grade Example

57. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Whole Class Instruction: First Grade Example 35% of the students in this class met the goal of reading 24 sounds or more in one minute 40% of the students met the goal of segmenting 35 sounds in one minute Tier 1 instruction will need to be as good as it possibly can be to catch these students up Tier 2 instruction (intervention) may be necessary for some students who do not make adequate progress in Tier 1

58. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Small Group Instruction: First Grade Example Small groups to help the 65% in letter-sound correspondences:  Rodney, Eliza, Daniel  Dora, Delia, Antwon  Angela, Alex, Tina, Jay  Chris, Gerry, Larah, Rey Small groups to help the 60% in phonological awareness:  Rodney, Eliza, Rey  Antwon, Alex, Dora, Delia  Gerry, Daniel, Angela, Clarissa

59. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Progress Monitoring Conduct progress monitoring assessments every 2-3 weeks Assess only students who do not meet goals on appropriate screening measures Examine students’ scores to look for progress in meeting established goals Use to help inform both whole group and small group instruction

60. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Next Screening: DIBELS TM Goals

61. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Progress Monitoring: Kindergarten LNF Example

62. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Progress Monitoring: Kindergarten PSF Example

63. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Progress Monitoring: First Grade NWF Example

64. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Individual Level Screening Progress Monitoring Error Analysis

65. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Initial Screening: Kindergarten Example

66. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Initial Screening: Kindergarten Example

67. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Initial Screening: Kindergarten Example

68. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Initial Screening: First Grade Example

69. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Initial Screening: First Grade Example

70. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Initial Screening: First Grade Example

71. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Progress Monitoring: Kindergarten LNF Examples

72. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Progress Monitoring: Kindergarten PSF Examples

73. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Progress Monitoring: First Grade NWF Examples

74. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Progress Monitoring: First Grade NWF Examples

75. (c) 2002 Good & Kaminski Error Analysis Using scored protocols to determine error patterns Used to inform whole group and small group instruction Examples:  PSF - students provide initial sound only  NWF - students confuse letter sounds

76. DIBELS TM : Overview and Use Kim Rodriguez & Thea Woodruff University of Texas Center for Reading and Language Arts Good, R. H., & Kaminski, R. A. (Eds.). (2002). Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement. Available: http://dibels.uoregon.edu/.