Scribd
Upload
15 views1 page

PM Info 2020

The document discusses PM Running Records, a levelled reading assessment system used in many schools. It notes that while some schools have implemented other literacy programs, they are still required to use PM Running Records for benchmarking. The issue is that the levelled reading system lacks a scientific basis, as most teachers receive little training in reading instruction. Teachers are given a brief introduction to PM Running Records and told to match students' reading levels to levelled books. However, teachers rarely use the data to inform individualized instruction. When the author inquired about the statistical norming of PM Reading Levels, the publisher acknowledged they had not been validated against other standardized tests and were established by expert opinion rather than research.

Uploaded by

Katherine Wurth
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
15 views1 page

PM Info 2020

The document discusses PM Running Records, a levelled reading assessment system used in many schools. It notes that while some schools have implemented other literacy programs, they are still required to use PM Running Records for benchmarking. The issue is that the levelled reading system lacks a scientific basis, as most teachers receive little training in reading instruction. Teachers are given a brief introduction to PM Running Records and told to match students' reading levels to levelled books. However, teachers rarely use the data to inform individualized instruction. When the author inquired about the statistical norming of PM Reading Levels, the publisher acknowledged they had not been validated against other standardized tests and were established by expert opinion rather than research.

Uploaded by

Katherine Wurth
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

PM information (2020)

I've been asked to share this little post about PM Running Records.

Recently, there has been lots of discussion about the PM Levelled Reading system and 'PM
Running Records' on a few other FB pages. This is a summary of my various responses, which
I've posted over the past 12 months.
Removing Levelled Readers in early literacy instruction is a tricky prospect because they are so
perverse in our schools and many school systems use PM benchmarking as a tracking system
across schools. Even though we implemented SW three years ago, we are still required to use PM
Running Records as this is what our system requires of us.
I think the issue is that there isn't really any 'science' behind levelled reading system. As many are
aware, the vast majority of teachers were/are not trained in the science of reading (as was I). So
we come out into schools as graduate teachers, filled with Whole Language / Balanced Literacy
ideology, and are given a PM Benchmarking kit, a 10 minute instruction on how to use it and off
we go assessing children and pairing their reading level with the 'very cleverly marketed' levelled
readers, of which schools have in abundance. Given that many teachers don't really know how to
teach reading, nor have a deep understanding of the Big 6 ideas, teachers are simply lead down a
path of blissful ignorance that if children continue to 'go up levels' then "I'm doing my job and
teaching my students how to read". I've heard this from far too many teachers. The fact is, that
PM provides a very simple (you can do a Running Record within 3-4 minutes), structured and
organised process for teachers and schools. We teachers are extremely time poor and so things
that are simple get traction. The incredible thing, is I've never (in 12 years) witnessed a teacher
who took that 'data' from a PM and used it to inform his/her teaching practice. Whereby s/he
provided explicit instruction to each student based on the child's 'needs', as identified by the
Running Record. Perhaps there are some teachers that do, but that would be a rarity.
On a side note, in July 2017, after sending several emails to Cengage Publishing (they publish the
PM Benchmarking kits), I finally got a response from their Publishing Manager.
The question in my email was:
"I'm trying to find the statistical norming data on the PM Benchmarking Assessments. In other
words, I'd like to know how the various reading ages were normed. What sample size was used
and was it done on an Australian population and when was the data normed. Can you please
help? Happy to speak on the phone to clarify"
The Publishing Manager called me and proceeded to give me a very long winded history of PM,
how the benchmark kit (originally just 4 levels) came from the Marie Clay folk in NZ, published
by Price Milburn (PM) and then grew into 10 levels and then eventually what we have now.
When I asked how the 'levels' are established and if the 'levels' have actually been validated using
some other valid, standardised norm-referenced tools, his response was "no, that would take too
much time and we don't need to because we have teams of expert writers that are able to write the
texts for the assessments at the right level". He then encouraged me to watch the following
video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JF02StvTUM
So, we have a levelled reading benchmarking system in our schools, that from what I can
ascertain, has no research or scientifically validated data set established. Instead (from the video)
Annette Smith states "The PM approach to levelling is relatively straight forward, we write
levelled books. We don't level books by comparing them to already published levelled books".

You might also like