Understanding Content Area Literacy

The very beginning of our course was devoted to the greater idea of content area literacy in the framework of which the necessity to read and write in every academic field were stressed. It was interesting to me to realize how literacy does not only occur in language arts but also in other subjects such as math, science, and history. This brought my thoughts to imagine that literacy in content areas must be a component of the instructional process in all the classrooms. The fact that, the content area teachers have the task to not only educate the students about the subject material but also assist in the reinforcement of their literacy skills was an eyes-opener. I especially liked the discussions on how differentiated instruction would enable provision of needs of diverse learners in the classroom.

            Personally, one of the points that impressed me was the recommendation or rather the need to identify the literacy deficits in time and act accordingly to correct the situation. Students with low reading skills, those who have language arts difficulties and those with difficulties on other subject materials require timely interventions to prevent failure. The activities administered in the class allowed me to realize that literacy is not just an understanding or vocabulary but critical thinking and content-specific learning as well. The significance of ensuring that literacy skills are incorporated in all subjects made me understand that preparation of the students to read in complex materials in all fields of life is very important as opposed to reading in textbooks.

Formative and Summative Assessments

            In this Chapter, we have been presented with the differences between summative and formative assessments. I really liked the chat on formative assessments as they concentrate on such gathering of information that can be used in the instructional practice in the process of learning. The idea of continuous assessment giving insights which could guide teaching in real-time has never really occurred to me before. It was a significant change in my way of thinking- formative assessments conducted properly provide instant feedback supporting students as well as teachers in terms of adjustments required and following improvements.

            Summative tests, on the contrary, are valuable when it comes to defining the level of student knowledge in the very end, however, they do not provide a lot of options concerning the real-time feedback. The activities of the classes helped me to understand how the two types of assessment contribute differently in the classroom. This also helped me understand the importance of assessment not only as the means of gauging the performance of the students but as the means of instructional guidance, especially with struggling readers as well as English-language learners.

            My understanding of reading has grown over the course of this class, especially when it comes to subject areas. Reading used to only seem important for language arts, but now I see how important it is for everything, even math, science, and history. Changing the way I think about things has helped me a lot.  There's more to being literate than just reading and writing.  Additionally, it means being able to carefully consider difficult data from various areas.  Dealing with reading issues early on is very important, as I have learnt from my own experience, because students often have big issues when they can’t read or understand subjects-specific books. Literacy growth is a process that never ends and needs to be checked on and assisted all the time. This realization has given me the strength to see reading as more than just a basic skill. It is a key to student progress in every area of life.  It has also made me more determined to give all of my students, but especially those who are having trouble reading and learning English, the tools and techniques they need to be great learners for life.

Norm-Referenced vs. Criterion-Referenced Tests

            The distinction between the norm-referenced tests (NRTs) and the criterion-referenced tests (CRTs). It surprised me that I discovered how NRTs make comparisons between how students perform compared to the general population and although they are effective in indicating where students are in relation to the rest of the population, one cannot have a great deal of details as it occurs with the criterion- referred testing. The CRTs are more concerned about the achievement of definite learning goals of the students and thus they are far more helpful in focused training. I found remarkable the fact that criterion-referenced tests can be applied as a formative assessment tool and lead to instruction, as well as help a teacher find out certain areas requiring additional attention. Another fact that I liked, which I learned in the course, is the validity and dependability of tests and in how they have the capacity to precisely determine the skills that they are supposed to evaluate. These evaluations will enable a more personal teaching, especially that of the struggling students.

Conclusion

            Understanding of norm-referenced test and criterion-referenced test has emphasized such important fact that the right assessment should be done on the right purpose be it the comparison of students within the larger population or whether students are mastering particular skills. In future as an educator, I intend to incorporate both these tools together in order to make sure that every student especially struggling readers, and ELLs gets the help they require to excel.