Informal Assessment analysis between Opitz and Scholastic article

Weaver, B. (n.d.). Formal versus informal assessments. Retrieved from http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/article/formal-versus-informal-assessments

Opitz, M., Rubin, D., & Erekson, J. (2011). Reading diagnosis and improvement: Assessment and instruction . (sixth ed.). Boston, Massachusetts: Pearson


Where do the ideas seem to merge?  What differences can you discern? 

I read this brief article stating the difference between informal and formal observations in order to compare it to Chapter 5 in Opitz's book on informal assessment. As Weaver states, “informal assessments are not data but rather content and performance driven.” Where Opitz states, “informal assessment techniques can provide valid information about student characteristics that cannot be garnered from other sources” (Opitz, p.89). Informal assessments are meant to be used to gather information on a students’ reading abilities in order to better prepare on how to help the student progress. We probably learn much more from informal observations because many times the teacher is taking more individual time with a student. Individual time with a student can allow for the teacher to become very aware of common mistakes made by the child and what issues the child is having with reading. Whether it be a performance task, checklist, anecdotal notes, or others the teacher can learn what is the best approach to help this child succeed. Weaver also states that “The assessment used needs to match the purpose of assessing” which goes right along with the three questions Opitz states throughout chapters 5 and 6 asking “What do I want to know? Why do I want to know? How can I best discover the information?” (Opitz, pg. 89).
Between the article and the text, I can conclude that both are saying how informal assessments should be used and why we use informal assessments. There needs to be a clear purpose for the assessment. We should be assessing, planning, and reassessing based on the information gained in the original assessment. Through informal assessments we should be able to chart progress with the student and if not we need to incorporate RTI strategies to help the student progress further.
I didn’t really notice many differences between the two writings other than the text has supplemental support to give ideas as to which informal assessments can be used. Chapter 5 and 6 are in a larger scale the same comparison as the article. We use both informal and formal assessments in reading but as teachers we need to be sure we are using them in the appropriate settings.
I find that I use more informal assessments during my reading instruction than I do formal. Through my writing block we are constantly producing performance assessments and three times throughout the year I must administer my running record literacy tests. Throughout my guided instruction in class I am adjusting my instruction based on how students performed the day before or minutes before. Reading is a subject area of which students can change drastically in just a second if not exposed to the appropriate text.