Assessment Experience #5 Romero 1

Assessment Experience #5

Student: Jennifer Herrera

Steven Romero

CIL 621: 1003

Dr. Chyllis Scott

University of Las Vegas Nevada

 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 2

According to the recap of the data I collected from Assessment Experience #1

Elementary Reading Attitude Survey Jennifer’s interest in reading is ranked as indifferent, which

upon close examination of the data and micronation suggests she has some low self-efficacy

when it comes to reading. This can be measured in her frustration level being at a seventh grade

read aloud level. She would approach reading through the breaking down words (sound,

blending, and syllables), but still struggled with annunciating words. The data in my second

assessment experience was framed ion grasping an understanding of Jennifer’s reading

comprehension. It revealed that she was at an “instruction reading level, “because she had an

adequate comprehension level and a reading accuracy that was considered too hard.

To further explore and understand Jennifer’s reading comprehension, I used three more

reading comprehension assessments on her third assessment experience. These assessments

provided me with insights to what Jennifer’s reading frustration level. She was able to score a

‘independent reading level’ ranking on level 5 and 6 but was at frustration on the level 7

assessment. Once again, I saw her struggle to pronounce and breakdown syllables. She also

struggled to answer some complex questions that involved inferential thinking and therefore was

capped at the sixth-grade level independent. This tells me that she is potentially behind one year

in her reading comprehension and literacy skills. For my fourth assessment experience I focused

on Jennifer’s writing skills, to determine how I could aid in developing her current skillset. I

used two different assessment rubrics, which made me conclude that because of the subjectivity

of writing, a rubric needs to be intentionally aligned with the assignment. I had her do an essay

about her favorite hobby. I realized that some parts of one of the rubrics was not as useful as the

other rubric because of the criteria in this type of writing project. As a result, these assessments

were telling me slightly different stories about her writing proficiency. This caused me to realize
 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 3

that these rubrics could potentially be used to assess different standards. Keeping in mind that

student contributions in their writing is also depending upon their own personal lived

experiences and background, rubric criteria may need to be revised. For example, in assessing

ELL/CDL students, it is important to grant students opportunities for literacy development

through an integration of writing projects allow them to connect the topic to what they have

experience.

Creating action plan aimed at developing her phonemic awareness, through word

blending and word rhyming practice would aid in helping her develop her literacy, since

phonemic aware ness was a challenge for her that was revealed throughout the assessments. The

standard I would focus on to assist her in her literacy learning would be CCSS.ELA-

Literacy.L.7.3, which focuses on using language conventions for reading writing, speaking, and

listening. I strategized on providing many scaffolding using anchor charts and words walls would

be my means of developing her literacy in my math class and developing her word sense. Her

struggle with pronunciation in reading aloud could be addressed by using choral readings along

with word segmenting. She could benefit from practiced pauses between words in read aloud, so

she could read to sound them out accurately, without feeling rushed. This is appropriate

considering her ELL background, which could not only be used to aid in all student’s literacies

ability, but also provide access to her literacy skills in her first language. It would impact on her

writing because of a prior set of discursive practices that she could utilize in pre-writes and edits.

I believe this would align with performance goals of grade level literacy and writing

development that could potentially be more engaging for all types of learners and have multiple

opportunities for hitting standard of English Language development.

 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 4

In conclusion to my assistant experiences I realize that my student’s phonemic awareness

is essential towards her overall literacy in reading interpreting and writing text. I learned that I

could have been more effectively in the selections of the type of assessments are used, the

example being with the personal essay I had Jennifer write and the parameters of the writing

rubrics that did not necessarily align with a personal essay. The strength of these assessments are

that they helped need to draw conclusions on what I can do to more effectively teach, and they

have also taught me how to consider the intersectionality of English language literacy and other

disciplines. Some of the weaknesses I saw in the assessments were that they do not incorporate

the whole student’s intellectual capacities nor do they incorporate student’s prior experiences as

assets to leverage for their learning.

Assessment Experience #5 Romero 5

Assessment Experience #1

CIL 621: 1003

Dr. Chyllis Scott

University of Las Vegas Nevada

 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 6

My student student’s Pseudo name is Jennifer. She is twelve years old and is the oldest of

three and is a student at Jerome D. Mack Middle school. Based off of her prior year’s score on

the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC), she is ranked as a 3 out of 5 on her level

of mastery of mathematics. I work as her Intensive Curriculum Unit ( ICU) period teacher for

Mathematics. This is a 30-minute time period designated to help students with Math or English.

She is one of twenty-two students in my ICU period. Our class objective is to help students raise

themselves 1 scale level on the SBAC exam for this 2019 school year. Jennifer is a 7th grader and

is bilingual in English and Spanish. She enjoys watching and playing soccer; her favorite Soccer

Team is the Chivas. Her reading interests revolve around topics about animals and historical

events, which I noticed in her “Student Interest Survey.” Jennifer appreciates topics related to her

Mexican heritage, which can be seen, as her favorite movie is Coco and vacation place is

Mexico. She hold a home responsibility of translating for her parents, for conversations between

her parents and her teachers. Jennifer is interested in becoming a Lawyer.

Jennifer’s data reveled has a score of 53 out of 99, which is between the “slightly smiling

Garfield” and the “mildly upset Garfield” for the Elementary Reading Attitude Survey. This

would suggest an indifferent overall attitude towards readings. This is a useful tool towards

providing qualitative information on Jennifer’s literacy and mathematical comprehension

development. As mentioned by McKenna, “ these types of Reader self-perception scales can help

“estimate attitude levels efficiently and reliably (McKenna & Kear, 1990, 124).”

For this assessment I used a protocol from the San Diego Quick to determine her

readings level and recognition of words out of contexts. I chose this assessment in particular,

because I have noticed a disconnect in some of my student’s ability to read and interpret

mathematical content vocabulary, which is an interdisciplinary literacy skill. From the San Diego
 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 7

Quick assessment data, I determined that she has made sense of words primarily through

breaking down individual words by sounds and through blending. For this assessment we used a

protocol from the San Diego Quick to determine her readings level and recognition of words out

of contexts. I chose this assessment in particular, because I have noticed a disconnect in some of

my student’s ability to read and interpret mathematical content vocabulary, which is an

interdisciplinary literacy skill. Jennifer’s data in the San Diego Quick independent level was at

the fourth-grade level, her instructional level with between the fifth and sixth grade level, and her

frustration level was at the seventh- grade level. In my assessment notes, I noticed she would

seek to say a word by breaking down words by its syllables. When she had made mistakes its

was partially due to miscues in understanding how to annunciate words based on their contexts,

which the test seeks to measure. It would be things like -vowel annunciation that changes in the

contexts of words. I saw that her knowledge of blending and sounding out were present and

represented of her having phonemic awareness. As suggested in the “Open House Video #1 -

Phonemic Awareness,” these are two of the four skills that can be directed with learning

strategies aimed at developing phonemic awareness (Reading, 2012).

The learning strategy I would use would be oriented towards developing my student

phonemic awareness, and two more strategies I could use are detailed instruction on blending

and word rhyming suggested in Open House Video #1 - Phonemic Awareness (Reading, 2012). I

would want to further my student’s ability to read aloud so she can begin moving towards using

academic vocabulary and be engaged in class. This can be done by using anchor charts of

mathematical procedures, with a supporting word wall of vocabulary. I could extend this by

using “Quizlet Live” activities, to go over key vocabulary words and ideas, while having these

blends, words sounds, and rhyme methods practiced. Following along this approach, I would
 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 8

look at standard Ccss.ela-literacy.l.7.4 to focus on vocabulary, this includes the, “ use context) as

a clue to the meaning of a word or phrase (2019 Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2019,

Para.11).” Using formative assessments like fist to 5 would help me guide and improve students’

understandings of vocabulary and inference making in readings.

The strengths of the San Diego Quick assessment are that they can reveal the level of

phonemic awareness my student’s may have and utilizes Jennifer’s ability to draw conclusions

through word dissection. It also helps by providing groups of words at ranging grade levels to

assess a students’ contextual understanding of words. This can help me support and scaffold

lessons for my students in my math class, by utilizing elements of Language Arts that is

interdisciplinary to mathematics. The weakness of using this assessment protocol is that it only

measures how students read aloud words out of contexts, but not necessarily the understanding.

My goal is to have my students to engage in more discourse so they can understand

content vocabulary and use deciphering strategies to make sense of tasks. Improvement for my

next assessment would be to direct my student to read aloud and provide contextual

understanding of vocabulary that is new or unfamiliar to them. This assessment impacted my

teaching by causing me to consider how my goals for my students could be alighted with

developing their literacy comprehension and understanding. I want them to interpret new topics

in a mathematics class. This has helped me to consider how to use data from assessments and

formative assessments more effectively for lesson planning.

I realize I take for granted Jennifer and my other students’ ability to use knowledge of

literacy to support their apprehension of content specific literacies in different subjects. Las

Vegas is a very transient area, many people from around the world come and settle here, so

considering the needs and experiences of those whom may not be fluent the English Language, is
 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 9

something I must keep in mind. As I progress as an educator, I am realizing that I must meet my

students where they are at, by gaining an understanding of what they know about the subject

Language comprehension and literacy are necessarily elements for successful educational

development in many disciplines and can be leveraged across them.

Assessment Experience #5 Romero 10

Assessment Experience #2

CIL 621: 1003

Dr. Chyllis Scott

University of Las Vegas Nevada

 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 11

My student student’s Pseudo name is Jennifer. She is a student at Jerome D. Mack

Middle school. I work as her Intensive Curriculum Unit Teacher ( ICU) period teacher for

Mathematics. Jennifer is a 7th grader and is bilingual in English and Spanish. Jennifer’s goal is to

become a Lawyer.

For this assessment, I used a comprehension assessment Protocol from The Flynt and

Cooter Comprehensive Reading Inventory-2 (Cooter, Flynt, & Cooter, 2013) to determine her

readings level and types of reading comprehension. I utilized the Level 7 “ The Canoe Trip”

(Cooter, Flynt, & Cooter, 2013, pp.92-93) narrative passage. She scored an “instructional reading

level” because he read 90-94 % of her passage correctly. According to reading protocol Jennifer

is “adequate” in level 7 silent reading comprehension, but her oral reading accuracy was “too

hard’ for her. She had scored a “move to the next passage level” on her listening comprehension

score, because she only missed two questions after being prompted by the teacher. I noticed a lot

of her miscues were caused by reading rapidly or not reading thoroughly. She made the mistakes

of mispronouncing words that were unfamiliar to her, even inserted letters or words to a sentence

to make sense out of it. These results showed that student may need further development her

phonemic awareness to improve her oral reading accuracy and comprehension.

Based off this assessment, I would need to focus on differentiating for my student’s oral

reading accuracy, so that their overall reading comprehension develops. A Useful strategy

suggested in the Open House Video #1 - Phonemic Awareness video was to increase a students

understanding through word sounding staatgies. The one I find most useful is “segmenting.” This

process starts, “by hearing or seeing a word and then you break it into its separate sounds” (Red

Apple Reading, 2012). I think this strategy could be useful in helping Jennifer breakdown and

pronouce new and unfamilar words to imporove her oral reading ability. This correspond with
 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 12

standard CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.7.3, which is to “use knowledge of language and its conventions

when writing, speaking, reading, or listening” (2019 Common Core State Standards Initiative,

2019, para.8). If Jennifer has a stronger understanding of language and its conventions when it

comes to reading words orally, she can improve her reading comprehesnion on these types of

narrative passages.

This assessment can be useful for helping teachers and educators recognize the areas a

student is strong in and need support in towards their literacy development. It can provide them

multiple levels of assessment on how a student interprets, read aloud, and draws inferences from

passages. I think I could have improved this assessment by making it clear to my student that it is

not about reading fast or doing well, but rather it is meant to help me recognize her literacy

skills. She had made simple mistakes like overlooking words or phrases that could have been

cause by anxiety from feeling like it was a high-pressure test.

As a developing first year teacher, I think my understanding of how to assess and further

guide my student’s literacy develop are growing. I am starting to see the parallels between how

my students’ ability to read efficiently and make connections to understand passages are a

necessary prerequisite for them to succeed in other core classes, like my math classes. Upon

critically reflecting on my assessment results I think aligning my lessons with a consciousness of

where my students are at in terms of literacy comprehension can help me to think of strategies to

make instruction for effective in the classroom. An example of this would be my student’s ability

to decipher a text like a “mathematical performance task” could be extremely useful in helping

them develop their conceptual understanding of mathematical standard.

Assessment Experience #5 Romero 13

Assessment Experience #3

CIL 621: 1003

Dr. Chyllis Scott

University of Las Vegas Nevada

 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 14

My student student’s Pseudo name is Jennifer. She is a student at Jerome D. Mack

Middle school. I work am her Intensive Curriculum Unit Teacher ( ICU) period teacher , which

is focused on developing my students’ Mathematics skills. Jennifer is a 7th grader and is bilingual

in English and Spanish. Jennifer is on our middle school volleyball team and wants to become a

Lawyer.

For this assessment, I used a reading comprehension assessment protocol from The Flynt

and Cooter Comprehensive Reading Inventory-2 (Cooter, Flynt, & Cooter, 2013) to determine

her readings level and types of reading comprehension. I utilized the level 5 “Popcorn” and level

6’s article “Cooking without Fire: The Microwave Oven” and, level 7 “Dimonds” article

(Cooter, Flynt, & Cooter, 2013, pp.226-229)” narrative passage.

On her level 5 comprehension assessment, she was ranked on a “Independent reading

level” because she read 97 % of her passage correctly, with only 4 errors. She scored “easy” for

the level 5 silent reading comprehension and “adequate” in oral reading accuracy. As a result,

her listening comprehension suggested that she should “move on to the next passage level.” Her

errors seemed to be the result of incorrect pronunciation and syllable breakdown; she also made

some insertions as she read aloud.

For her level 6 narrative passage, Jennifer was ranked at the “Independent reading level”

because she read 97 % of her passage correctly, with only 2 errors. For Jennifer’s silent reading

comprehension, she missed two question and received a “adequate” score and on her oral reading

accuracy she also scored “adequate.” With her errors in reading and answering questions about

the passage, she seemed to have trouble answering questions on scientific facts that might not
 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 15

have been existing in her pool of prior knowledge. However, she still demonstrated enough to be

considered fluent to move on to the level 7 passage.

On the level 7 passage, Jennifer reached her “frustration level” because she had made

7oral reading errors. She had missed 5 question during her silent reading comprehension of the

exam and since she made 7 errors, she had a performance summary of “too hard” on the level 7

assessment. These results showed her phonemic awareness could improve her oral reading

accuracy and comprehension, but the access to prior knowledge required to answer some the

questions could have posed a challenge in properly assessing her literacy level.

According to Carpenter and Peris’s article, “Center for the Improvement of Early

Reading Achievement”:

IRIs are overwhelmingly text based, emphasizing the readers ability to reproduce the

ideas of the author rather than to integrate those ideas with their own knowledge

…centered upon the background knowledge of the reader (Peris & Carpenter, 2003, pp.

145).

These scholars raise this point to suggest that while standard IRIs can help provide teachers and

educators knowledge about a student’s literacy level, they can be presumptuous of prior

knowledge that a student may not necessarily have access to. They raise some points on how the

different levels of questioning beyond literal text questioning is something that would give

educators a more holistic understanding of how students think about a piece of literature and

perceive reading. As a solution they suggest that IRI creators make a more ardent effort to ask

open ended questions to gauge student thinking. They suggest that educators like myself can also

part take in making IRI literacy assessments useful tools for obtaining data by, “ choosing them

[IRIs} more judiciously… [and by] incorporating questioning techniques that encourage a
 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 16

response from children…to identify reluctant or struggling readers as early as possible (Peris &

Carpenter, 2003, pp.179).” Keeping these critical thoughts in minds, I think being more

conscious of a student’s literacy abilities, character, and interests could be useful in deciding on

IRIs. Designing an open-ended line of questioning to gauge my student’s thinking and how they

understand an article of literature as they attempt to relate it to them self. This would allow me to

understand how to support students like Jennifer and enable me to take a more direct approach

towards developing their literacy comprehension.

These ideas of reevaluating assessements, could suppport standard CCSS.ELA-

Literacy.L.7.3, which is to “use knowledge of language and its conventions when writing,

speaking, reading, or listening (2019 Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2019).” If

Jennifer gains a stronger uderstanding of how to tie the naarative and ideas brought up in a text

to her own train of thought, then she will be able to make interrences, draw conclusions, take a

position on a matter. This would enable her to develop more with her lietracy comprehsnion and

grown in confidence in her ability to read.

I think incorporating open-ends opportunities for students to extend their thinking and

reason through a text would help them develop as readers, and potentially see reading as an

opportunity. I think I can incorporate this into my classroom by having my students engage in

discursive practices and share their ideas on what would be asked of them and how they might

do it, when going over a new set of directions for a new unit.

My goals for my students in my math class, is to have them see themselves as capable

interpreting and taking a problem, through reading, thinking, and struggling to find solutions. A

large part of math, no matter the topic, is problem solving. This is a life skill that will enable

them to be college or career ready as they begin their soon to be adult lives. I believe one way
 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 17

that would help serve my students in their confidence in mathematics is to develop their capacity

to read and think with a resilient mind-set that allows think to share their thinking. Planning

open-ended opportunities for my students to think and even share their thoughts of what is

possible when it comes to a topic in math could serve them in their literacy development and

other academic areas.

Assessment Experience #5 Romero 18

Assessment Experience #4

CIL 621: 1003

Dr. Chyllis Scott

University of Las Vegas Nevada

 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 19

My student student’s Pseudo name is Jennifer. She is a student at Jerome D. Mack

Middle school. I am her Intensive Curriculum Unit Teacher ( ICU) period teacher, which is a

Math support class. Jennifer is a 7th grade student and is bilingual in English and Spanish.

Jennifer plays on the school’s volleyball team and aspires to become a Lawyer. I had Jennifer

work on her essay assignment on her Chromebook, since my site school is technology oriented

and Jennifer is already skilled in using google suites for her academic work. The two rubrics I

am using to assess her writing sample are the “Higher-Order Concern Writing Continuum” and

the “Traits Rubric for Grades 3–12,” to assess her writing proficiency and offer supports for

furthering her writing skills. To begin I had her write an essay responding to the following

prompt: What is one thing you enjoy doing that you consider your hobby? What about it interests

you? How would you explain this hobby to a friend?

After assessing a writing sample of Jennifer’s writing sample with both rubrics, I realized

that how proficiency was reflected was assessed differently. These two rubrics assessed different

aspects of writing : the writing continuum focused on purpose, audience, focus, and organization

with a focus on the process of revision. The traits rubric focused on ideas, organization, voice,

word choice sentence, fluency, conventions, and presentation. Jennifer’s writing reflected

proficiency on the “Higher-Order Concern Writing Continuum(Scott, Nagelhout, & Spies, n.d.)”

rubric with an overall average of ranging at stage 3 of writing proficiency. She received a not

proficient on the “Traits Rubric for Grades 3–12” (Education Northwest, 2014) rubric with an

overall average of 3.58, which is in between developing and capable. These two rubrics had

differentiating definitions of writing proficiency, one was focused more the product and the

continuum seemed more focused on the production (Scott, Nagelhout, & Spies, 2018). In

accordance with the Stages of Writing development: Portraits of Writers Jennifer would be
 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 20

deemed a bridging writer because she was able to convey her main point of “liking soccer and

seeing it as her hobby( Stages of Writing development: Portraits of Writers, n.d.).”

My findings from these rubric assessments, these two assessments have different

orientation on what is qualified as “proficient writing,” which could mean that they are rubric

that would probably have different used depending on the style of writing and writing objective.

For example, in the continuum article the focus was on “production [that] privileges “the

process” including writing to learn over the final product (Scott, Nagelhout, & Spies, n.d., pp. 3).

This is suggesting that the writing process, which includes student centered metacognitive

revision, is more important than the final product. This rubric would be weak if the writing

assessment was focused on a standards like CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.7.2.b, which focuses on

writing. Contrastingly, the traits rubric seemed more focused on elements of writing such as

high-level vocabulary use, spelling, and minor punctuation. It would be useful in assessing

students on standard CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.7.2.b of correct spelling. However, I think if we

center the meaning and main ideas of writing being brought up by students in the writing, then

the “Trait rubric” does pay adequate attention to students current writing and literary abilities.

Keeping revisions and student’s writing process in mind, I would suggest that the RAFT

writing strategy would be a useful differentiation strategy for supporting a student like Jennifer

further her mastery of writing. The writing prompt and objective for Jennifer’s essay revision

would lend itself to standard CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.7.3.a: which requires students to choose

language that expresses ideas precisely and concisely, recognizing and eliminating wordiness

and redundancy. The areas of growth in Jennifer’s essay include: the need to clarify and expand

on an idea, organize the structure of her essay, and have a clear beginning and closing to her

response to the prompt. By using the RAFT model, Jennifer will reevaluate the role, audience,
 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 21

format, and topic in her revision process. This could be done by, “[having] the student review the

concept and assignment orally first (AdLit.org, 2008), which could allow them to

metacognitively assess the tone, flow, errors they made in their writing. I think this would help

Jennifer improve her essay’s statements and also allow me to be a support for helping her self-

actualize her own development in the writing process. With this in made, I believe she may help

her “eliminate … redundancy (2019 Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2019, para. 9)”

that is present in her essay about ‘really liking soccer”.

While remaining critically conscious of English language Learners and Culturally and

Linguistically Diverse students in mind, like Jennifer, the traits rubric does not provide adequate

attention to students with variating backgrounds and literary skills. As mentioned in the

Continuum article, “ experiences and cognitive processing skills to strategically generate text,

and strategically use funds from various discourses, such as homeland and communities(Scott,

Nagelhout, & Spies, n.d., pp. 1).”” I believe students have to be able learn and to do certain

things to be college and career ready, assessing students on one criteria like the “traits rubric”

does, would not be useful in assessing student’s preexisting knowledge. To be able to support all

students, including ELLs/CDLs, I think the continuum rubric and approach for developing

student writing is the most useful. This continuum considers, “ recursive writing process is a

natural scaffold to support ELs in accessing the medium and structure of English (Scott,

Nagelhout, & Spies, n.d., pp. 3).”It frames student’s ability in writing as an asset worth

leveraging, rather than a deficit or barrier for student success. I think I am making progress in

understanding the big picture goal of all of the assessments we have done thus far and how they

can potentially help support literacy and learning. I could have improved on this assessment by
 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 22

revising the prompt to include a clear thesis statement and concluding paragraph, along with

making sure Jennifer understood its objective.

Reflecting on these types of rubric assessments, I think considering the type of rubric and

procedure we will follow as educators, needs to be strategically planned based on our goal for

our students and based off what skills they have to bring to the table. I learned that I value

student’s growth and movement towards mastery of writing as opposed to them scoring well on

an ELA standards-based standardized test.

 Assessment Experience #5 Romero 23

References

2019 Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2019). English Language Arts Standards »

Language » Grade 7. Retrieved 03 2019, from Common Core State Standards Initiative:

Preparing Students for College & Career: http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-

Literacy/L/7/

AdLit.org. (2008). RAFT. Retrieved from Reading Rockets:

http://www.readingrockets.org/strategies/raft

Cooter, R. B., Flynt, E. S., & Cooter, K. S. (2013). The Flynt/Cooter Comprehensive Reading

Inventory-2: Assessment of K-12 Reading Skills in English and Spanish (Vol. 2). New

York, New York: Pearson Education.

Education Northwest. (2014). Trains Rubric for Grades 3-12.

McKenna, M. C., & Kear, D. J. (1990, 05). The Reading Teacher. Measuring Attitude toward

Reading: A New Tool for Teachers, 43(9), 626-639.

Peris, S. G., & Carpenter, R. D. (2003, 03). Center for the Improvement of Early Reading

Achievement: FAQs about IRIs. International Reading Association , 6(6), 578-580.

Reading, R. A. (Director). (2012, Jan. 28). Open House Video #1 - Phonemic Awareness [Motion

Picture]. Youtube.

Red Apple Reading. (2012, Jan. 28). Open House Video #1 - Phonemic Awareness. (Red Apple

Reading) Retrieved 03 2019, from Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACS5BY_bMK4 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Scott, Nagelhout, & Spies . (n.d.). HIGHER-ORDER CONCERN WRITING CONTINUUM.

Under Review, 1(1), pp. 1-29.

Stages of Writing development: Portraits of Writers. (n.d.). n.a.