Explore the vast range of titles available.

With dialogic writing assessment, teachers can scaffold students’ writing processes in ways that are flexible and responsive to students’ individual needs. Examples of teachers using this conference‐based method of classroom writing assessment illustrate how to practice assessment that is dynamic and relational rather than static and standardized, by allowing teachers to vary their support for student writers based on students’ unique needs. These examples also suggest that teachers’ epistemologies for writing instruction can influence how they practice dialogic writing assessment. The authors conclude with a discussion of how dynamic and responsive scaffolding can support an equity‐focused model for teaching academic writing and how teachers’ expertise may be a factor in how they apply dialogic writing assessment.

Recent research has demonstrated that self‐correction is particularly important for beginning and struggling readers; readers who self‐correct more make progress more quickly. The authors describe findings from that research, outline how self‐correcting behavior might vary, and provide suggestions for how students’ self‐corrections can inform scaffolded instruction.

Responding to recent challenges to Clay’s Running Records (2019) and their analysis using a three-cueing system, the authorI examines this reading assessment from an additive perspective of both bottom-up and top-down orientations of reading instruction. Endorsing their inclusion among classroom reading assessments, the author I navigates the tension between the two orientations by examining signposts of both that can be found in Running Records. In the discussion, I include a corresponding framework to assist teachers’ interpretation and instructional planning for strategic actions, including searching for, using, and cross-checking various sources of information; solving words; monitoring; self-correcting; and maintaining fluency. When applied formatively, Running Records may be an assistive component in classroom reading assessment, yielding instruction targeting automaticity decoding and deeper comprehension.

Running records can be the assessments that teachers are looking for when searching for an efficient way to plan meaningful literacy instruction. Running records can give teachers immediate insights to guide on‐the‐fly prompting and teaching decisions to build reader independence. The authors use classroom examples to illustrate how taking and analyzing running records can save time, focus instruction, and identify patterns that might otherwise be missed during guided or independent reading. It is time to revisit and revive the purpose, remember the practice, and reinvigorate the analysis of running records for intentional, individualized instruction.

The authors describe Monster, P.I., which is an app‐based, gamified assessment that measures language skills (knowledge of morphology, vocabulary, and syntax) of students in grades 5–8 and provides teachers with interpretable score reports to drive instruction that improves vocabulary, reading, and writing ability. Specifically, the authors describe why an assessment of language is important to include, the components of language that are assessed by Monster, P.I., and how Monster, P.I., uses gamification to add enjoyment and motivation to the assessment experience. The authors then explain how to use Monster, P.I., to inform instructional decisions, specifically explaining the overall instructional framework, what each score means, and examples of instruction that link to each area assessed by the app. Links to Common Core State Standards are included. The authors conclude by sharing teachers’ feedback on the assessment and how they used it to support instruction in their classrooms.

Teaching is a profession that requires ongoing professional development and learning. This ongoing learning can take place in professional learning communities, in structured professional development settings, and in literacy coaching contexts. This department highlights the ongoing professional development of literacy teachers.

With the pressures put on teachers today to meet standards, cover a dense curriculum, and be involved in numerous meetings, taking the time to reflect on instruction may be pushed aside. The authors examined the importance of reflection and its impact on teaching and learning. Reflection allows teachers to evaluate subjective and objective criteria that help them respond and make modifications to lessons. Many teachers engage in reflection intuitively. The authors describe how one teacher fully engages in the reflective process through the use of the reflective SOAP (subjective, objective, assessment, plan) strategy. In an era of accountability, SOAP notes help document instruction and student learning, thus benefiting educators and students. The SOAP notes model can be applied to any content area across all grade bands. One must consider the question of how teachers can fully engage in reflection to improve instruction and meet the learning needs of their students.

The three accuracy ranges for oral reading—easy, instructional level, and hard—are familiar to almost everyone who teaches young students just learning to read. It may come as a surprise to learn, then, that no study has yet been conducted with beginning readers to support our well‐accepted views about accuracy ranges and their role in reading development. What accuracy range is optimal? Does it really matter if a student reads with less than 90% accuracy? In this article, the authors share what they learned when they explored these questions about oral reading accuracy and student progress.

To positively influence students’ behavior and social relationships in the school and community settings, teachers can support students during early interventions and active conversations. Conversations held during class time that use picturebooks and restorative practice activities can be an appropriate way to support student learning and engagement. Lessons and activities can be implemented through any subject and integrated into classroom discussions to support students’ relationships, personal growth, well‐being, and behaviors. Incorporating discussions surrounding picturebooks with specific messages relating to social skills or situations in the classroom or community can support a restorative justice framework. The authors present ideas and activities relating to using picturebooks while upholding a restorative environment.

Discussions about literacy assessment can often be polarizing for teachers, school administrators, and other stakeholders. Given the diverse and often charged perspectives on assessment within both the profession and the broader public discourse, it can be difficult to engage in productive dialogue about the role that literacy assessment plays in promoting or inhibiting effective models of literacy education. This department provides perspectives, questions, and research that enables readers to better advocate for themselves and their students as they develop their own assessment programs and respond to assessment programs that are imposed on them.