Using Informal
Assessments in RF
IRI
Michael C. McKenna
University of Virginia
Sharon Walpole
University of Delaware
Today’s Goals
 Define informal assessments and describe
their role in reading.
 Become familiar with a variety of informal
assessment tools available to Reading First
teachers.
 Critically evaluate these instruments in terms
of their usefulness to teachers.
 Plan to acquaint teachers with the most
useful.
Back in School . . .
Present selected informal instruments to
teachers.
Help the teachers create a system for
using these instruments to follow up
DIBELS screening results.
What is an informal assessment?
Informal assessment is defined as “appraisal by
casual observation and other nonstandardized
procedures”
– The Literacy Dictionary (IRA)
An informal assessment “is one in which teacher
discretion plays a major part. The teacher, for
example, may decide to modify how the test is
given, based on early responses given by the
student.”
– McKenna & Stahl (2003, p. 24)
Characteristics of Informal Assessments
 Criterion referenced
 No strict rules for administration
 No strict rules for interpretation
 Reliance on teacher judgment
 Subject to modification during testing
Examples of Informal Assessments
 A sight-word inventory based on an
established word list
 An inventory of phonics skills
 An oral reading fluency test based on a current
reading selection
 An untimed letter recognition inventory,
consisting of all upper- and lower-case letters
 An untimed phonological awareness test
comprising tasks at several levels
How do informal
assessments fit into
GARF?
An informal
assessment can serve
as a diagnostic test if it
identifies skill deficits.
In GARF, an informal
assessment would
follow a screening test
that has identified a
weak area. The
informal assessment
breaks that area down
into specific skills.
Some GARF assumptions . . .
Assessments used in Reading First
must have acceptable reliability and
validity.
Many informal assessments possess
these qualities.
Informal assessments are diagnostic
when they can help teachers identify
skill deficits to address instructionally.
Coaches’ Corner
To what extent are your teachers using
informal assessments?
Which are most popular? Most useful?
What about informal
reading inventories?
An IRI combines a
number of informal
assessments of word
recognition and
comprehension. It can
give tentative answers
about certain questions.
Let’s look at one …
An IRI contains …
 One or more sequences of graded word lists
 One or more sequences of graded passages
 Questions accompanying each passage
 Criteria for interpreting comprehension and
oral accuracy
An IRI can provide . . .
Estimates of Reading Levels
Independent
Instructional
Frustration
Estimates of Listening Level
Information about Decoding Development
Overall Strategy for Giving an IRI
Estimate
Independent Level
(usually by giving word lists)
Give Corresponding
Passage
Move Up
(continue to
frustration)
Yes
Independent?
No
Move
Down
But is an IRI reliable and valid?
A published IRI has many
components. Some may
be more reliable and
more valid than others. It
may be better for a
teacher to keep a “toolkit”
of informal assessments.
Let’s read about why.
Walpole, S., & McKenna, M. C. (2006). The role of
informal reading inventories in assessing word
recognition. The Reading Teacher, 59, 592-594.
Read this article. It critiques the
traditional IRI and suggests some
cautions and alternatives.
What have we learned?
 What are some of the drawbacks of an IRI?
 What do Walpole and McKenna see as the
proper role of an IRI?
 What is a chief way IRIs tend to “overreach”?
 An IRI can screen in what four areas?
 What “tools” should a teacher include in a
toolkit of informal assessments?
Let’s Plan . . .
 Together, let’s examine sample reproducible
instruments that we might include in a toolkit.
 We’ll use four old sources:
 McGee and Morrow (Kindergarten)
 Lapp, Flood, Moore, and Nichols (Grade 1)
 Paratore and McCormack (Grade 2)
 McKenna and Stahl (K-3)
Some Informal Reading Assessments
Alphabet Recognition
McGee & Morrow, Appendix C
Tyner, pp. 18-19 and Appendix A
McKenna & Stahl, pp. 92-93 and 107
Phonological Awareness
McGee & Morrow, Appendix E
Paratore & McCormack, p. 70-71
McKenna & Stahl, pp. 108-109
Phonics
McGee & Morrow, Appendix F
McKenna & Stahl, revised phonics inventory on Architect site
McKenna & Stahl, pp. 143-152
Sight Words
McKenna & Stahl, pp. 130-136
Tyner, Appendix A
Oral Reading Fluency
McKenna & Stahl, pp. 72-76
Vocabulary
Paratore & McCormack, p. 77-79
Comprehension
McGee & Morrow, Appendix H
Paratore & McCormack, p. 67; 79-86
McKenna & Stahl, pp. 184-189
Back at School . . .
Decide which instruments would be useful
at which grades.
Plan to present these instruments at
grade-level meetings.
Explain their connect to screening tests.
Seek a commitment to administer the
instruments, perhaps just one to start with.
Facilitate planning based on the results.
References
McGee, L. M., & Morrow, L. M. (2005). Teaching
literacy in kindergarten. New York: Guilford Press.
McKenna, M. C., & Stahl, S. A. (2003). Assessment for
reading instruction. New York: Guilford Press.
Paratore, J. R., & McCormack, R. L. (2005). Teaching
literacy in second grade. New York: Guilford Press.
Tyner, B. (2004). Small-group reading instruction: A
differentiated teaching model for beginning and
struggling readers. Newark, DE: International
Reading Association.
Walpole, S., & McKenna, M. C. (2006). The role of
informal reading inventories in assessing word
recognition. The Reading Teacher, 59, 592-594.