5.7 The Classroom Assessment Toolkit: Running Records, SOLOM, Checklists, and Inventories
Key Takeaways
- Informal assessments include running records, oral language observation matrices, checklists, anecdotal notes, rubrics, reading inventories, and portfolios.
- Formal assessments include statewide standardized tests, end-of-course exams, and teacher-made unit tests administered under standard conditions.
- Running records classify text as independent, instructional, or frustration level and reveal which cueing systems a reader uses.
- The Student Oral Language Observation Matrix rates comprehension, fluency, vocabulary, pronunciation, and grammar on parallel scales.
- Interest and attitude inventories supply motivation and background data that no proficiency test captures.
5.7 The Classroom Assessment Toolkit: Running Records, SOLOM, Checklists, and Inventories
The ETS content outline is unusually specific here. Under "understands a variety of formal and informal methods to assess receptive and productive language skills," it enumerates informal methods — running records, SOLOM, checklists, anecdotal notes, rubrics, reading inventories, subject-area interest and attitude inventories, portfolios, worksheets, homework — and formal methods — statewide standardized assessments, end-of-course exams (EOCs), and teacher-generated formal assessments. Expect items that name an instrument and ask what it measures, or describe a need and ask which tool fits.
1. Formal vs. Informal: What Actually Distinguishes Them
| Formal | Informal | |
|---|---|---|
| Administration | Standardized procedures, timing, and scoring | Flexible, embedded in instruction |
| Scoring | Predetermined, often external | Teacher judgment, often rubric-guided |
| Frequency | Periodic (annual, end of course, end of unit) | Continuous, often daily |
| Purpose | Accountability, placement, program evaluation | Instructional decision-making |
| Examples | ACCESS for ELLs, ELPA21, state content tests, EOCs, unit tests | Running records, SOLOM, anecdotal notes, checklists, exit tickets |
Note that formal does not mean standardized-by-a-publisher. A teacher-made unit test given to all students under the same conditions with a fixed answer key is a formal assessment. And informal does not mean casual — a running record follows a strict coding procedure.
2. Running Records
Developed by Marie Clay, a running record captures a student's oral reading of a text in real time. The teacher marks each word read correctly and codes every deviation: substitution, omission, insertion, self-correction, appeal, and told.
Accuracy rate = (words read correctly ÷ total words) × 100
| Accuracy | Level | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| 95–100% | Independent | Read alone; use for volume and fluency building |
| 90–94% | Instructional | Right level for guided reading with teacher support |
| Below 90% | Frustration | Too hard; comprehension collapses |
Miscue analysis: the part that matters most
Beyond the percentage, a running record shows which cueing systems the reader is using when they deviate:
- Meaning (semantic) — does the substitution make sense? (pony for horse)
- Structure (syntactic) — is it grammatically possible in that slot?
- Visual (graphophonic) — does it look like the printed word? (house for horse)
A reader who substitutes house for horse is over-relying on visual cues and not monitoring meaning. A reader who substitutes pony is using meaning and structure but not attending closely to print. Self-corrections are positive evidence: they show the reader is monitoring and cross-checking.
EL caution: a running record scores accuracy, not comprehension. A multilingual learner may read at 96% accuracy and understand almost nothing (the word-caller profile, Section 2.9). Always pair the running record with a retell or comprehension check, and interpret miscues against the student's phonological system — substituting /tink/ for think is a pronunciation feature, not a reading error (Section 2.10).
3. The Student Oral Language Observation Matrix (SOLOM)
The SOLOM is a teacher observation instrument for rating a student's oral language use in natural classroom interaction rather than in a testing situation. The teacher observes over time and rates five dimensions:
- Comprehension — how much classroom conversation the student understands
- Fluency — how smoothly and continuously speech flows
- Vocabulary — range and precision of word choice
- Pronunciation — intelligibility to listeners
- Grammar — control of English structures
Each dimension is rated on a parallel scale from the lowest to the highest level of functioning, and the ratings are summed to produce a total that districts map onto local proficiency bands. Its value is that it captures spontaneous oral language in authentic contexts — exactly the domain that written tests cannot reach and that is easiest to misjudge from a brief interaction. Because it depends on teacher judgment, districts should train raters and, where possible, have more than one observer contribute (an inter-rater reliability concern, Section 5.2).
4. The Rest of the Informal Toolkit
| Instrument | What it captures | Best use |
|---|---|---|
| Anecdotal notes | Dated, factual observations of specific behaviors and language use | Building a longitudinal picture; documenting pre-referral evidence |
| Checklists | Presence or absence of discrete, observable skills | Quick, repeatable progress monitoring toward specific objectives |
| Rubrics | Quality along defined criteria at defined levels | Performance tasks, writing, presentations; analytic rubrics separate content from language (Section 3.5) |
| Informal reading inventories (IRIs) | Word recognition, oral reading accuracy, and comprehension across graded passages | Determining independent/instructional/frustration levels; identifying decoding vs. comprehension breakdowns |
| Interest and attitude inventories | What a student likes, values, reads, and believes about themselves as a learner | Text selection, motivation, relationship building, funds-of-knowledge discovery (Section 6.2) |
| Portfolios | Longitudinal collection of work with student reflection | Documenting growth over time across all four domains (Section 5.3) |
| Work samples, worksheets, homework | Routine evidence of skill application | Daily instructional adjustment |
| Dynamic assessment (test-teach-retest) | Responsiveness to mediated instruction | Distinguishing a learning difference from a lack of prior opportunity (Section 5.5) |
Interest and attitude inventories deserve emphasis
The ETS outline names them specifically, and they are the instrument teachers most often skip. For a multilingual learner they yield information no proficiency test provides: prior schooling experiences, home literacy practices, topics of genuine expertise, career aspirations, and self-concept as a reader. That information drives text selection, project design, and family engagement — and it operationalizes the asset-based stance that the Culture category requires.
5. Choosing an Instrument
| Question the teacher needs answered | Instrument |
|---|---|
| Is this book the right difficulty for this reader? | Running record or informal reading inventory |
| How does this student use spoken English in real classroom interaction? | SOLOM |
| Did each student meet today's objective? | Checklist or exit ticket |
| How good is this piece of writing, and in what respects? | Analytic rubric |
| Has this student grown across the year? | Portfolio with dated artifacts |
| Why is this student disengaged from reading? | Interest and attitude inventory |
| Is the difficulty a lack of skill or a lack of prior opportunity? | Dynamic assessment |
| How does this student compare to the state standard? | Formal state assessment or EOC |
A teacher takes a running record and calculates 92 percent accuracy. What does this indicate about the text?
During a running record, a student reads 'The horse ran across the field' as 'The house ran across the field' and continues without pausing. What does this miscue reveal?
An ESOL teacher wants to document how a newly arrived student actually uses spoken English during collaborative work, rather than in a testing situation. Which instrument is designed for this purpose?
A 7th-grade multilingual learner reads assigned texts at 96 percent accuracy but participates minimally and reports that he 'hates reading.' Which assessment should the teacher administer to inform next steps?