The Assessment to Instructional Planning (ATIP) Framework: A Multidimensional, Contextualized Approach to Using Assessment to Plan Instruction

Abstract

Purpose – To present the Assessment to Instructional Planning (ATIP) framework that uses assessment to guide instructional planning.

Design/methodology/approach – The ATIP framework is comprised of three interconnected processes: data collection, data analysis and interpretation, and instructional planning.

Findings – In the ATIP framework, data collection includes reviewing background information and developing and implementing an assessment plan. The data analysis and interpretation process begins with scoring assessments and progresses to contextualizing results and making decisions. Instructional planning moves from setting goals to selecting instructional methods and materials, implementing instructional checkpoints, and monitoring and adjusting instruction.

Research limitations/implications – The ATIP framework provides a step-by-step process that educators can follow to use assessment to plan instruction. ATIP requires that educators already have knowledge of literacy assessment and instruction to apply the Framework appropriately.

Practical implications – The ATIP framework can be applied for students in grades K-8 in clinical settings, school-based intervention programs, and elementary and middle school classrooms.

Originality/value – This chapter provides three profiles to illustrate the ATIP framework in clinical, small-group intervention, and classroom settings with different levels of readers with varying strengths, needs, and backgrounds.

Citation

Elish-Piper, L., Hinrichs, S., Morley, S. and Williams, M. (2012), "The Assessment to Instructional Planning (ATIP) Framework: A Multidimensional, Contextualized Approach to Using Assessment to Plan Instruction", Ortlieb, E. and Cheek, E.H. (Ed.) Using Informative Assessments towards Effective Literacy Instruction (Literacy Research, Practice and Evaluation, Vol. 1), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 251-291. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2048-0458(2012)0000001012