What Did the Child Actually Learn?

An observation guide for after a reading session

Madarej Children — For professionals | For educators, teachers and activity leaders | Suggested use with children aged 6–8

The children have finished the story. Hands went up and worksheets are full. The session looks successful. But when a colleague asks, “What did they understand?”, can you say something more precise than “They were engaged”?

Participation deserves recognition, but it cannot answer the question of understanding on its own. A child who never raises a hand may understand; another may repeat a classmate’s words without being able to explain them. Our task is to see clearly what happened and make the next meeting more useful.

This guide accompanies an existing reading session; it does not add a test at the end. Choose one goal, keep one short observation and decide on one adjustment. The record helps educators organize their work. It is not a standardized measure of a child’s ability, a diagnostic tool or a basis for school admission. The examples below were invented for training; they are not accounts of real children or findings from a field trial.

1. Decide what you want to observe before you begin

“I want the child to understand the story” is too broad to guide an observation. Choose something the child can show during the session, such as:

• Putting two events from the text in order.
• Identifying a sentence that supports an answer.
• Distinguishing information the text gives from a detail we do not yet know.

Start with just one. Write down what you would accept as evidence. If the goal is to sequence two events, it may be enough for the child to point to two word cards in order after you read them aloud. Do not require a written paragraph: writing is not the goal you chose.

Also distinguish understanding a text heard aloud from reading it independently. If you read the text to the child, record understanding after listening. Do not turn that observation into “read the text alone.” Whenever the support changes, the description of what the child managed must change too.

2. Write what you heard, then what you make of it

Use two separate lines:

What happened: “The child said, ‘The plant went inside because the wind was strong,’ and pointed to the sentence about its leaves moving.”

My provisional interpretation: “In this attempt, the child linked moving the plant to a reason given in the text.”

Do not replace these with “Clever; understands quickly.” Such a broad label tells a colleague neither what worked nor how to help next. Likewise, “Did not answer today’s question” must not become “Does not understand stories.”

Record the words as honestly as you remember them. If you cannot recall the wording, write “Summary of the answer” and do not use quotation marks as if you had a verbatim recording. You do not need to catch every word. A limited, truthful note is more useful than an invented complete record.

3. Record the support: it is part of the picture

A child may give a suitable answer after you repeat the question, read a sentence or offer two possibilities. That participation matters; just do not call it fully independent.

Use one of these four descriptions on the educator’s record:

Description of the attempt	When to use it
Demonstrated without additional help	The child met the goal after the agreed instructions, with no extra prompt.
Demonstrated after specific help	The child did so after an intervention you record precisely, such as rereading a passage or explaining a word.
Not clear in this attempt	The child participated, but the response was insufficient to judge the goal or remained inconsistent with the text.
No suitable opportunity	The child did not participate, did not get a turn, the session was interrupted or the circumstances were unsuitable.

These are working descriptions proposed by Madarej, not validated developmental scores. Do not turn them into numbers or rankings. “No opportunity” does not mean “No learning.”

Agree beforehand on the usual instructions: is the text visible to everyone? Does the educator read it aloud? May children return to it? Then record any help beyond that starting point. Otherwise, two educators might call the same response “independent” and “supported” simply because they used different starting rules.

4. Try the record with one situation

Short practice text: “The classroom plant stood near the window. A strong wind blew and its leaves moved. The teacher moved it farther inside until the wind calmed down.”

Goal: The child connects moving the plant with the wind, using the text.

Question: “Why did the teacher move the plant inside? What in the text helps you answer?”

This example is not a success benchmark for every child of a particular age. It is a short exercise for educators to practise describing and deciding.

Attempt A: an answer with evidence

The child said, “Because the wind was strong,” then pointed to the sentence about the wind. The educator gave no extra prompt.

Record: demonstrated without additional help. A word-for-word quotation is unnecessary. Later, use a different text with a clear cause to see whether the child uses this approach again.

Attempt B: a response after returning to the passage

The child first said, “To water it.” The educator reread the sentence about the wind and asked the child to think again. The child said, “Oh, because of the wind.”

Record the first answer, the change and the support. Description: demonstrated after a specific sentence was reread. Next time, let the child return to the text before you select the sentence. The first answer does not prove that the child was not listening to the story.

Attempt C: a possibility the text does not mention

The child said, “Because the teacher is going away.” The text said nothing about travel.

Say, “That could happen in another story, but what does our story tell us?” If the connection remains unclear, record the limits of this attempt. Do not call the child a liar. This is an answer or a guess about a text; you have no evidence that the child deliberately said something contrary to what they knew.

Attempt D: choosing not to answer

The child indicated that they did not want to speak. Let them pass without questioning them about it. Later, if they wish, you can offer the option of pointing to a sentence you read aloud.

If you receive no response, record: no suitable opportunity. Their understanding remains an open question. Do not fill the gap with your expectations of the child.

5. A brief observation record

Copy this onto plain paper. You do not need an app, an account or to upload a child’s data to the website.

Material and passage: ………………………………….

Session number: …….. Optional local tracking code: ……..

One goal: ………………………………….

How the text was presented and the usual instructions: ………………………………….

Question or task: ………………………………….

What the child actually said or did: ………………………………….

Additional help I gave, if any: ………………………………….

Description: Without additional help / After specific help / Not clear / No suitable opportunity.

My provisional interpretation and its limits: ………………………………….

One adjustment for the next session: ………………………………….

What I will look for next time: ………………………………….

Do not let completing the form take priority over listening. You can write afterwards or take turns with a colleague facilitating and observing. In a group, spread your attention across sessions so that the record does not cover only the quickest responders.

6. Choose an adjustment that fits the observation

If a child offers ideas from outside the text, follow up by asking them to return to one sentence, not by asking a string of harder questions. If an answer follows a word explanation, check next time that the words essential to the meaning are clear.

If speaking is difficult, allow pointing or arranging written cards that the educator reads aloud. Record the response method so your description remains accurate. Do not change several things at once and then attribute improvement to just one without evidence.

Make feedback useful for the next attempt: “You found the reason in the sentence about the wind. Next time, look for the sentence that explains the reason.” This identifies something the child actually did. Warm encouragement can accompany it without comparing the child with classmates.

7. What does comparing two sessions mean?

You can revisit the record after another session, but first compare the goal, how the text was presented and the support given. A better answer to an easier text, or after more prompts, does not automatically mean greater independence.

Write something like: “In the first session, the child needed the sentence reread. In the second, they identified the cause in a different text after the question alone.” That is more accurate than “Understanding improved by 80%” when you have no measurement to justify the figure.

Do not attribute the change to your activity alone. Other practice, prior knowledge or differences in texts and circumstances may have helped. These observations serve to improve teaching, not to prove a programme’s effectiveness. If performance varies, keep that variation in the record rather than selecting only the best result to show.

8. A short exercise for reviewers

Ask two educators to read the four attempts above and describe each before seeing their colleague’s description. Then discuss: which words supported your decision? What help did you count as additional?

In attempt B, if someone writes “independent” because they consider only the final answer, return to the educator’s intervention. In attempt D, if one writes “not clear” and the other “no opportunity,” check whether any response was obtained at all.

This practises a shared understanding; it does not establish the tool’s validity or reliability. No child photographs or recordings are needed. If you disagree about a real situation, keep the account of what happened and what remains unknown rather than forcing agreement on paper.

9. What stays private to the child?

Collect only what you need for follow-up and keep the sheet out of public view. Do not share names, individual answers or photographs of records in open groups. Even a local code can reveal identity when linked to details others recognize; it does not guarantee anonymity.

When talking to the family, share a specific observation and a supportive next step: “The child connected the event with its cause after we returned to the sentence. Next time we will let them choose where to look.” Ask what the family notices during familiar reading activities, without turning the conversation into a judgment of the child’s ability or upbringing.

Do not use the record to examine a child’s intentions, religious truthfulness or sincerity, or to require disclosure of a personal experience. Protect their dignity and keep correction focused on the task. Specialist assessment requires its own appropriate procedures and qualified tools; do not draw a diagnostic conclusion from this sheet.

Before you put the sheet away

Ask yourself: did I describe something that happened? Did I record the help? Did I leave what I do not know open? Did I choose one practical next step?

The best outcome may be a change to your own question. Then the sheet becomes more than a record of the past: it helps make the next encounter more welcoming and clearer for the child.

Sources and limits of their use

• NAEYC: Observing, Documenting, and Assessing Children’s Development and Learning: informs goal-related observation, attention to language and ways of responding, and the limits of conclusions from a non-standardized tool. The specified online section was read; we do not claim to have read every reference in the developmentally appropriate practice statement.
• EEF: Teacher Feedback to Improve Pupil Learning: the guide’s overview page was read, not the full report. Its focus on useful feedback and on not assuming that all feedback helps informed this guide. We report no effect size and promise no outcome for this record.
• Madarej’s existing “A Young Reader Asks” material, post 1629: its assessment, adaptation and session sequence were reviewed to avoid duplicating the programme. This record can accompany it, but is for educators and reviewers and does not repeat its four sessions.

The examples, record structure and descriptions of attempts are Madarej editorial work. They have not undergone a field trial or human specialist review. The sources do not endorse this product. Ages 6–8 describe the suggested scope of this version, not age-based standards for mastering the tasks.