What is an appropriate frequency for evaluating reading comprehension?

The choice of evaluating reading comprehension with a combination of both informal and formal assessments is appropriate due to the comprehensive insights such an approach provides. Informal assessments, such as observations, discussion, and performance tasks, help educators identify students’ understanding and application of reading skills in real contexts. They also offer immediate feedback, allowing for adjustments to instruction based on students’ needs.

Conversely, formal assessments, which may include standardized tests or structured assessments, provide data that benchmarks student performance against established standards and norms. This dual approach ensures a well-rounded evaluation of reading comprehension, capturing both the nuances of individual student growth through informal measures and the broader educational accountability through formal measures.

Using only one type of assessment might overlook key areas of development; for example, relying solely on informal assessments may miss critical skill gaps that formal assessments help identify. Conversely, relying exclusively on formal assessments may not accurately reflect a student's day-to-day understanding and struggles in reading. Therefore, combining both types of assessments yields a richer, more accurate picture of a student's reading comprehension abilities and areas for growth.