CA credentialing: the RICA

It's true that people don't read for fun anymore. Nope, they read for "literacy."
The Reading Instruction Competence Assessment (aka RICA) is a huge exam all California teachers need to take in order to get their credentials. It is one sick test - difficult too.

I took two semesters worth of language and literacy classes to prepare for the RICA, in addition to my own independent studying. But really, most of what I learned about teaching reading came from actually teaching reading, especially all the word knowledge and phonics work done in the first grade.

One of the major things I worked on in preparation for this exam was just understanding the definitions of all the wacky terms used in literacy. Homophones, the "schwa," what it means to be an "independent" reader (there is an actual number that goes with this definition!), and my favorite term to say: the dipthong! Even student interest in reading was analyzed down to a science.

You only need a 60% to pass. Which is a D, and a D is a passing grade. Barely. And here I thought teachers were being held to a higher standard?

Don't get me wrong, I'm ok with a 60% passing grade. I probably got something in the 60's or 70's (they don't tell you exactly - like the CSET, you've either passed or not passed). The policy just seems inconsistent to me. But then, the CCTC never really directly claims they are consistent.

But the craziest thing of all? Students themselves are learning these literacy terms that adults still have to look up. Honestly, never in my adult life have I cared about knowing the difference between superlatives and comparatives. Actually, to this day, I still pronounce "superlatives" wrong (I say, "SU-per-LA-tives" and then have to correct myself with "su-PER-la-TIVES").

Yep, students are tested on whether they know what the official definition of an adjunct is, more so than on how to use an adjunct effectively in writing. Some people think this is a waste of brain space, and I tend to agree.

Courses: language and literacy

I like L&L. Not only does it involve a lot of reading and writing, it reminds me of Hawaiian barbeque.

No, seriously. Beef BBQ with spam sushi, come to me!

Anyway. Although L&L methods courses differ in different programs, mine was pretty sweet. We did a case study, learned various methods of assessment (some of which were VERY scientific and research-ified), studied a lot of flow charts/activities/poetry scaffolds/etc, and became familiar with the world of children's literature. We also became bonafide Scholastic book order whores. 50 cent book deals, come to me!

Most of all - or perhaps it seemed like a "most of all" since it was at the top of everyone's minds - we prepared for the RICA. The Reading Instruction Competence exam which, when passed, gives the "English Language Authorization" part to the Multiple Subject 2042 credential. Which is what I'll get in December.

Side note: I better pass this semester of student teaching, damn it!

*Ahem*

Well, more details on the RICA later. I'm mentioning it now because it and my two semesters worth of L&L were so closely tied together that it's hard to tell them apart sometimes.

We also created original lesson plans, which we implemented in student teaching, as well. Although I think my cohort had grown a little teacher-whine by the second semester. Our professor had mercy on us and shortened the assignment from a minimum 5-lesson unit to a 2-lesson collaboration done with a partner.

In hindsight, I still don't think I'm completely prepared for the rigors of teaching ELA and ELD on a daily basis. A handful of teaching ideas per week for two semesters does not a perfect ELA program make. I own these three resources, plus another binder full of activity ideas, and still it won't be enough for a full school year's worth of lessons. I kinda wish I had more - although this will come with more time and experience too.

But then, what is a "perfect" program? Who knows.

BOOYAH!

Feeling like a triumphant Bonta-kun. Photo from here.

RICA.....

Pass!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah!  Eat that California Commission on Teacher Credentials!

That d*** RICA, part III

The end of the tunnel! Unfortunately, I don't know what's beyond that...
It's over! w00t! I'm about 90% certain I passed. I better have passed, because I'm not spending another $130 and 3 hours of my life taking a test that allows a failing score to "pass." Not to mention that fact that they told us to arrive at 1:15 but didn't actually start the thing until 2. Curse you California Testing Services. And your little dog too.

But I'm thankful it's over. Now I've only got the rest of this semester and the PACT and we're home free! Yay!

That d*** RICA, part II

My dream is to own a room full of floor-to-ceiling bookshelves

Finished the multiple choice section of the practice exam on the RICA website. I got an 87%, which is not terribly great, but also not terribly failing either. But then, a 60% is a passing score. Which I really don't understand, it's almost like a waste of time to even have people take the test when one can pass with an equivalent grade of D.

Anyway, here are some of the questions I got wrong.

#9

A second-grade teacher informally assesses students' reading development by listening to them read aloud. Anna, a student who generally reads aloud fluently, reads aloud a short story selected by the teacher. In this instance, Anna correctly decodes about two-thirds of the words and pauses frequently as she reads. This informal assessment suggests that Anna:

a) needs instruction designed to improve her phonemic awareness.
b) is likely reading a story at her frustration level.
c) needs instruction designed to improve her oral language skills.
d) is likely reading a story at her instructional reading level.

Correct answer: b

I chose d) at first. I always forget that instructional and frustration levels actually have numbers attached and aren't just a subjective assessment. The instructional reading level is if the student is reading fluently at least 75% of the time. Frustration level is at least 50%. Of course, independent reading level is about higher than 75% of the time, and complete incompetency (this is not the technical term, but I'm too lazy right now to look through my notes for it) is 50% and below.

#15

Which of the following instructional strategies is likely to be most effective in improving the reading fluency of Tolana, a third-grade student?

a) Tolana practices reading a favorite story aloud several times and then reads it into a cassestte recorder to tape the reading.
b) The teacher helps Tolana increase her reading rate by prompting her when she hesitates over unfamiliar words while reading aloud.
c) Tolana reads aloud an unfamiliar passage from a content-area text and then completes a semantic web to clarify the ideas in the passage.
d) The teacher models for Tolana how to take advantage of context clues to identify unfamiliar words while reading aloud.

Correct answer: a.

I chose d), again, at first. I guess I just didn't understand the question very well at first. Practice is usually the most effective way to improve fluency. However, fluency does not equal comprehension, nor does it mean the student will have the same fluency level for a completely different text selection after practicing one story over and over again. Also, some students can read really fast, but at the same time make many careless mistakes. I would rank comprehension and fewer reading mistakes much more important than reading fast.

That d*** RICA, part I

Literacy: the more you read the more you know!

I'm taking the RICA in about 2-3 weeks and I'm STILL not particularly anxious about it. My intentions for winter break were to study for the thing everyday, but so far I've probably only accumulated about an hour and a half of actual study.

So I'm worried about not worrying about it. Great. I should be worried because a significant number of people I know failed it on the first try. I'm not worried because I was lucky enough to have taught first grade in phase I and pretty much have a solid base on teaching literacy in elementary school.

Still I'm studying the sample questions available online this last week of winter break. I don't trust the study guides for RICA - I looked at them in a bookstore once and found a lot of mistakes. The commercial CSET study guides were like that too, lots of mistakes. But I figure if I can identify the mistakes for myself, then I'm good to go on the actual test.

Sample question 1

Compared with standardized reading assessments, one important advantage of informal reading assessments is that they allow the teacher to:

A: characterize a student's reading proficiency in terms of grade-level performance.
B: personalize reading assessments to identify the needs of individual students.
C: avoid bias in the administration and interpretation of reading assessments.
D: compare the reading performance of individual students to other students in the class.

Correct answer: B

Informal reading assessments by nature are biased and differs according to each individual student. Thus they can't be used as a comparison. Nor can you judge a student's grade-level performance because informal assessments target specific reading weaknesses, not an overall picture of the student's abilities.

Sample question 2

An elementary school teacher is considering various instructional methods and materials to use in relation to specific reading objectives. When making these decisions, the teacher's first priority should be to select methods and materials that:

A: address the reading strengths and needs of all students.
B: reflect the latest trends and ideas related to reading instruction.
C: represent the most cost-effective approach to reading instruction.
D: are recommended by other experienced teachers in the school.

Correct answer: A

This one is pretty obvious. The latest trends are not always the ones that work the best; same applies to recommendations from other teachers. It may have worked for some students, but for sure it won't work for all. I believe they just threw option C in there to fill up space.

There are basically two choices for reading curriculum mandated for California public schools: Open Court and Houghton-Mifflin. Both cost and arm and a leg, and maybe a soul. It's such a waste too, because most effective teachers will supplement these materials with their own stuff anyway - stuff that's usually better suited for the class because it's the teachers that know the students, not the curriculum creators.

Sample question 3

A 6th grade teacher is reviewing the results of a standardized reading test that include a grade-equivalent interpretation of student performance on the test. When reviewing these data, the teacher should understand that a grade-equivalent score of 6.4 is intended to indicate that a student's reading performance on this test:

A: was as good or better than 64% of students in the same grade in the same school.
B: places her/him in the top 6.4% of students at the same grade level in the same school.
C: was as good or better than 64% of students in the same grade nationwide.
D: corresponds to the expected skill level of a student in the fourth month of 6th grade.

Correct answer: D

A typical school year is about 10 months long. The common decimal system is base 10. Toss in some quick math skills and I'm golden. D is also the only option that has nothing to do with % - which good test takers should be able to deduct that "the one different from the others is the correct choice."

If that weren't enough to convince anyone: grade-equivalent scores mean that if a student gets a score that matches their grade, then they are at the level of a student beginning that grade. A 5th grader with a score of 6 means they are at the skill level expected of a 6th grader at the beginning of the school year. But if the 5th grader scores a 4.5, then he/she is at the same skill expectation as a student halfway through the 4th grade (which, by the way, is quite tragic, even though the score difference is only a point and half). More simple logic, and the "0.4" part of "6.4" is solved. ::sigh:: If only all of the RICA questions were so handily based upon mathematics.

Keep in mind that even grade-equivalent scores can be misleading. Although a 5th grader scoring 5 sounds like he/she is meeting standards, it really depends on when the test was taken. If it was at the beginning of the year, it's fine and dandy. If it was at the end of year, the student really should be scoring something closer to a 5.8 or 5.9, if not higher.

I would put more, but that's enough for now since it would make this entry super long and I haven't figured out how to make my blog template recognize the html codes for expandable post summaries.

Questions from www.rica.nesinc.com