Saturday, March 1, 2025

Muldaur, Sheila. (2004). Theory and Use of Genre Assessment. Reviewed by Jennifer A. Borek, University of Memphis

Education Review-a journal of book reviews

Muldaur, Sheila. (2004). Theory and Use of Genre Assessment. Katonah, NY: Richard C. Owen Publishing, Inc.

160 pp.
$21.95     ISBN 1-57274-664-5

Reviewed by Jennifer A. Borek
University of Memphis

September 24, 2005

When readers question structure they ask, “Does that sound right?” In writing, the grammatical structure, or placement of words within sentences, is often dictated by the genre of the text. (p. 9)

The idea of genre influencing student understanding called author Sheila Muldaur to create a series of genre assessments to use with different types of literature. With these assessments, the author divides the eight identified genre into three modules. Fables, fairy tales, and fantasies; informational, biographical, and procedural; and poetry and plays are the modules, and are separate books with specific assessments tailored to each category. This book contains the theoretical framework for this approach, as well as practical tools for teachers to work with among their students.

While some information will undoubtedly be a review for those familiar with reading pedagogy, the author is concise in her descriptions of the reading process. After her overview, though, she plunges straight into the uses of the Proficient Reader Record (PRR). The forms involved in this process are 1) Assessing Reading Process, 2) Assessment Genre Understandings, and 3) Evaluation. Muldaur describes how to use these three forms to assess and improve student reading.

In order for this process to work, the teacher administers one PRR evaluation at a time. She will fill out forms 1 and 2 using a prescribed set of steps that collect data needed to complete form 3, and evaluate the student’s current level of understanding. With this information, she can then help the student further along the path toward proficiency. The steps involved in the data collection are:

  • Record the oral reading (first 100 to 150 words)
  • Conduct the interview (the teacher poses questions that show how the reader uses the genre to understand the text)
  • Evaluate the results of the oral reading record and interview
  • Score student responses with the rubric as either proficient, developing, beginning, or no evidence of use
  • Collect data to demonstrate student achievement
    • A level of proficiency is determined after one assessment and recorded on Form 4: Class Composite-Proficiency Levels
    • If assessments are administered before and after multiple readings and instruction in the same genre, growth can be measured and graphed.
  • Write a summary statement that shows a composite picture of the student’s reading level that evaluates understanding, approximations, and next steps.

Muldaur’s examples of the forms throughout the book allow readers to understand thoroughly her vision of assessing students in this method. The example given, an assessment of “The Lion and the Mouse,” demonstrates the typical method of oral reading records, but gives the teacher sample questions of pre and post comprehension. Since the focus of this book is elementary teachers, it is likely that they will have become familiar with such forms in their pre-service or in-service lives. Even so, the form presented here is thorough and concise in its approach to discovering quickly how well a student predicts and comprehends an age-appropriate reading.

Form 2 allows the teacher to explore the reading further with the student. It begins with questions regarding the identification of the genre. The teacher asks if the student can name the genre, what makes the reading part of that genre, and, where appropriate, a third question. The question given for “The Lion and the Mouse” is “Long ago, how did people learn these stories?” The blank forms at the back of the book indicate that no third question is necessary if the teacher feels that the first two suffice.

The second section of Form 2 asks how the student attended to the structure of the piece. The student recalls the story, the problem, and the ending. The teacher copies down the student’s overview of the story, and then moves on to section three, which asks about word-level comprehension and vocabulary. The questions not only attempt to discover if the student understood the vocabulary, but how they attempted to understand unfamiliar words. The other categories of questions ask the student to recall the characters and their qualities, interpret the moral of the story if they find one, and find if the student believes he could write in the genre and what the topic would be.

The PRR Evaluation, Form 3, provides categories into which the teacher assesses the student to be proficient, developing, beginning, or showing no evidence. The categories for evaluation are those from the first two forms, and produce a rubric score and a proficiency level percentage. Also on the form are directions for the summary statement. The example given, however, is not a statement. It is a series of bullet points listed under “strengths,” “approximations,” and the other categories. These bullet points are perhaps more user-friendly than a statement, but as an English educator, I would find another name for them that represents what they are. They are, in fact, categorizations of information to help the teacher quickly remember the student’s strengths and challenges. With the example, I believe teachers will be able to use the strategy effectively. If there had been no example, I would have thought the summary statement was something quite different.

Because teaching reading is so fraught with emotions from both teachers and students, the author describes using these assessments for formative as well as summative evaluations. Form 3 allows teachers to designate a percentage score for each student’s reading proficiency. This method makes summative evaluations of reading consistent and more related to the assignments. For formative evaluations teachers can use the form to guide them in understanding student needs and individualization of reading instruction.

Chapters 3 and 4 discuss methods of planning for this type of individualization within the larger classroom setting. Both chapters give specific advice about whole group and small group activities that support individualization, and point out ways to create time in the school day for administration of these assessments. I will also add that given the nature of these assessments, if teachers use them once and they do not go as smoothly as planned, they should not give up. Students will learn the routine, and, especially if they see the assessments as related to their progress in reading, they will welcome the chance to show the teacher how they are doing.

Chapters 5 and 6 discuss evaluation and data management. For teachers who are not familiar with data-driven instruction, these chapters give many helpful examples. Chapter 7 takes teachers through the process of developing their own assessments for their students. The whole book is well written, but I confess that this is my favorite chapter. The rubber hits the road where teachers must create their own reality for their classrooms. The guide to creating these assessments will help teachers create a reality that supports student reading proficiency, and aide teachers in their quest to instill the love of reading.

Muldaur has created a gestalt for teachers that will help them to help students understand genre. This process, when used well, will give teachers the tools to help students meet their potential as readings, and guide their planning more effectively.

About the Reviewer
Jennifer A. Borek

Jennifer A. Borek is an assistant professor of secondary language arts education at the University of Memphis. Her primary research areas are accommodations of students with disabilities in the secondary English classroom and the use of the fine arts in the English curriculum.

Copyright is retained by the first or sole author, who grants right of first publication to the Education Review.

No comments:

Post a Comment