Assessment Evaluation

BookJan292025.pdf

Home >Education homework help >Assessment Evaluation

13 Reading

LEARNING OUTCOMES After reading this chapter, you will be able to: • Identify and describe three examples of considerations in assessment of

reading. • Name and discuss two examples of subtests in the Woodcock Reading Mastery

Tests-Third Edition.

• Describe the purpose of the Gray Oral Reading Tests-Fihh Edition. • Name and explain two Examples of Subtests in the Test of Reading

Comprehension-Fourth Edition.

• Compare and contrast three measures of phonemic awareness and phonological processing.

• Describe an example of a curriculum-based reading fluency measure. • Compare and contrast two informal reading inventories. • Identify and explain two examples of other informal strategies. • Name and discuss two major factors that relate to reading within the context

of the classroom.

• Define and explain two examples of how reading assessment tools could vary in answering the assessment questions.

348

. '

f,Y reRMS I( d I jteraCV balance ic awareness . phonern ical processing h0nolo9

P d·ng deco ~cabulary ·r1ht V SI~ .

phonics

fluency comprehension skills informal reading inventory miscue analysis doze procedure readability

h rs parents, and the American citizenry place great value on literacy and eading is cons1 ere to _et e most important literacy skill. In the elementary Teac e ' 'd d b h . ,

r des much of the cumculum focuses on skill acquisition in reading, and in ra , . . . . g dary grades, readmg is a maJor vehicle for the presentation of information in

che secon bJ'ects In our society, people are expected to be proficient readers· illiteracy ent su . , cont fi •ce barrier to success. · de 101 d d' . h U . d S 1s 11 he value place on rea mg m t e 01ce tates is highlighted by che Reading

T gram created under the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act. According to this F. est pro · p· 'd 1 bsi· ce Readmg irst prov1 es grants to states to promote research-based strate-

c's we ' a~ for students in lower elementary grades (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.). gies R ading is often an area of difficulty for students with disabilities. Young scu-

~ay not learn the basic skills of reading at the expected rate; they may fall far dents · h · b·1· d od d

h. d their classmates m t e1r a 1 tty to ec e an understand the written word. be

10 fu h b h' d · d' Older students who are even . rt er e •.n in rea mg may lack the skills needed to

reading as a tool for learning other skills and subjects. use_ Once students are found eligible for special education services, the focus in assess ment shifts to instructional planning. The question that guides this phase of assess ment is, What are the student's educational needs? Because reading is often an area of need for students with mild disabilities, the assessment team may ask, What is the student's e11rrent level of reading achievement? What are the student's strengths and weaknesses in the 11ario11s skill areas of readi~g?

At this level of questioning, the team is concerned more about the student's abil ity to perform important reading tasks than about how performance compares with that of other students. Although norm-referenced information can be useful in deter mining which reading skills are areas of need, criterion-referenced information and other types of informal data provide specific descriptions of the student's current sta tus in skill development.

CONSIDERATIONS IN ASSESSMENT OF READING Of all academic skills, reading is most often the subject of special education assess ment. For many educators, reading is one of the most critical of all school subjects, P~icularly in the elementary curriculum that focuses on the acquisition of basic skills. In the secondary grades, students are expected to use their reading skills to gain

349

3 5 Q PART IV: ASSESSMENT OF ACADEMIC SKlll.S

ioformatioo io subject areas such as English, his tory, and the sciences. Because many spec!al s_ru deots do not meet these expectations, reading 1s a major concern in special education assessment.

P111poses

Students' reading skills are assessed for seve~ reasons. In determining eligibility for spec1~ education programs, overall school performance is investigated, and reading is an important compo• aent of school achievement. In addition, general education teachers monitor their students' pro gress in reading. Reading proficiency is one of the minimum competencies assessed by many schools and districts for grade advancement and high school graduation, and reading is always included on the state-mandated tests of school achievement that assess students' progress toward state perfor mance standards.

Io special education, reading skills . ~ assessed not only for determining program eltg1- bility, but also for planning instruction, and that is the focus of this chapter. Information from gen eral achievement teSts such as the PIAT-RJNU, the WIAT-III, or the Woodcock-Johnson N is insuf ficient. It is necessary to gather additional data about the student's specific strengths and weak nesses to describe current levels of reading per formance. It then becomes possible to develop appropriate annual goals for the student.

Reading assessment does not stop when the student's individualized educational program has been planned. Special educators begin to monitor the student's progress in acquiring targeted skills, and in ongoing assessment, data are gathered on a weekly or even a daily basis. Reading assessment continues throughout the student's special educa tion program if reading is a focus of specialized instruction. At least once a year, the educational plan is reviewed, and evaluation data are gathered to determine the student's current levels of read ing achievement.

Skill Areas

Reading is a complex process involving many skills. There is continuing debate over the nature of the reading process, but most expercs acknowl edge chat reading involves the recognition and

decoding of printed text and the comprehension of that text as meaningful information. According to Schreiner (1983), individuals interpret essen tial printed components and then give meaning to those components.

Three divergent models of proficient reading have been proposed (Chall & Stahl, 1982). These models differ in the amount of importance they attach to text and meaning, two aspects of the reading process. In the bortom-11p model, it is hypothesized that proficie~t r~n~ers proceed from text to meaning; first, md1v1dunl letters and words are perceived and decoded, and then com. prehension of the text's rnean_ing take~ place. Reading is considered a text-driven or stunulus driven activity; it depends on the reader's skill in lower-level processes such as word recognition. In contrast, the top-</Qwn 11UJ<k/ emphasizes what are considered the higher-level processes of compre. hension. The skilled reader relies on prior knowl edge and previous experience, quest~oning and hypothesis testing, and comprehension of the meaning of textual material rather t~an decoding of individual text elements. The thud model is the interactive model, which emphasizes both tel(t and meaning. In this model, reading is accom. plished by applying previous knowledge to text so that the student can build a reply or answer (Walker, 1992).

The debate over the relative importance of text versus meaning or decoding versus compre hension carries over into the classroom and the strategies selected for reading instruction. More traditional approaches to reading instruction tend to be skills-based (i.e., bottom-up). Beginning instruction focuses on the development of decod. ing skills; comprehension skills are not empha. sized until learners have some facility with decoding. Examples are traditional basal reader programs, phonics-based approaches, linguistic methods, and programmed instruction.

A newer approach, whole-language instruc tion, is based on the top-down and interactive models of reading. Reading is not broken down into subskills such as decoding. In fact, reading is integrated with the ocher language arts (speak. ing, listening, and writing). Whole language is often described as a philosophy rather than an instructional approach (Westby, 1992); in this

philosophy, language is innate and has real-life application through literacy (Lapp & Flood, 1992). In the whole-language classroom, language learn ing takes place in a social context in which stu dents use language for real (i.e., authentic) purposes. Students read whole texts, not frag ments, and those texts tend to be children's litera ture rather than stories constructed solely for inclusion in textbooks. Throughout, meaning and motivation are emphasized; the development of isolated skills is deemphasized. Despite the popu larity of whole language, research results do not point co the superiority of chis approach over basal reader programs (e.g., Stahl & Miller, 1989). In addition, authors such as Lerner, Cousin, and Richeck (1992) and Mather (1992) warn that stu dents with mild disabilities will require supple mentary skills instruction if they are to succeed in a whole-language classroom.

In recent years, experts have come co recom mend a combined approach to reading instruc tion, one that emphasizes the development of abilities not only in the decoding of print hue also in the comprehension of textual meaning. A report of the National Research Council's Com mittee on the Prevention of Reading Difficulties in Young Children (Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998) describes the reading process in this way. They note that both form and context are essential cog nitive conditions of reading.

One popular exam pie is the balanced literacy approach. This approach includes both reading and writing and focuses on the acquisition of both decoding and comprehension skills. Cunningham (2003) describes the balanced literacy model called the Four Blocks framework. In this model, each day students engage in four types of literacy activities: working with words (i.e., word study), guided reading, self-selected reading, and writing (Cunningham & Allington, 1999; Cunningham, Hall, & Defee, 1991).

The federal education law, No Cb,ild Left Behind (NQB), and its counterpart in special education, IDEA 2004, place great emphasis on the use of scientifically based instructional meth ods to promote student achievement. The Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching Children to Read (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2000) identified several

CHAPTER 13: READING 3 5 1

components of evidence-based instruction in the area of reading:

• Phonemic awareness instruction • Phonics instruction • Fluency and guided oral reading • Vocabulary instruction • Text comprehension instruction

Walsh, Glaser, and Wilcox (2006) reported that the National Reading Panel's recommendations include foci on organized and overt instruction of phonics, oral reading, vocabulary construction and reading comprehension.

Phonemic awareness is an important readi ness skill for the acquisition of beginning reading skills. Lerner (2000) defines this skill as identify ing sound segments within words. Those indi vidual sounds are called phonemes, thus the term phonemic awareness. Another term, phonological processing, is used to describe more complex operations with phonemes such as discrimination among phonemes, rhyming, sequencing, and recall. Because failure to develop phonological processing abilities can impede the acquisition of beginning reading skills, it is believed that young children with potential problems in this area should be identified so that they can receive appropriate training (Torgesen & Barker, 1995; Wagner & Torgesen, 1987). To this end, several measures of phonological processing skills have been developed in recent years.

In the assessment of reading itself (rather than reading readiness skills), traditional meas ures tend co be skills-based. They focus on the student's ability to decode text and respond to questions about the meaning of the text he or she has read. As Garner (1983) observed, these measures are product-oriented, and they are based on a bottom-up view of the reading act. Reading tests and inventories do not stress the interaction between the reader and the text. Thus, informal assessment strategies are needed to gather information about the student's back ground knowledge, language facility, knowledge of text structure, and the metacognitive strate gies he or she chooses to use when interacting with text (Samuels, 1983).

Formal reading tests and inventories typi cally include measures of students' decoding and

3 5 2 PART IV: AS.5~\lL.'-'l' OF ACADE.\UCSKILLS

comprthension skills. Decoding skills are word

recognition skills; decoding occurs v.·hen • sru denc looks at a word, or the letters chat make up the word, and then pronounces the word. Decod ing can be accomplished in several \\"l)'S· W~rds chat are familiar to the student may be recogmzccl by sight; such words a.re called sight words or sight vocabu!U}•. When words a.re unfamiliar, the scudenc may attempt to use phonic analysis, often called simpl)' phonics. The srudent looks at each letter, or grapheme; rccalls the sound, or pho neme, associated with the letter; and blends the sequence of sounds inco a word. Another method of decoding unfamiliar words is smicrural analy sis. In chis method, words arc broken inro sylla bles to analyze prefixes, suffixes, root words, and endings. In yet another approach ro decoding, the context of the sentence or paragraph in which the unfamiliar word apptarS is the subject of analysis. The srudent uses the meaning of the passage and the grammacioo structwt of the ten as aids in word recognition. Phonic, muawal, and contex tual analyses are not necessarily independent strategies; srudents can use one, two, or all three of these methods co demde an unfamiliar word.

Decoding skills arr asstSSed in scveml ways by reading tests and inventories. One typial method is to present students v.ith a list of words tO read aloud. The cask may be unrimed to allow srudents the opportunity co use phonic and strue· rural anal)-sis skills. Howevrr, wks m rimed if the purpose is t0 assess sight vocabu1acy or if the speed of decoding is a concern. ListS of pboneti ally regular words or nonsense words may be used to cwluate the student's ability to apply phonic analysis skills. Nonsense words force sru dents to analyze each word rather than ttly on sight recognition. Another common method of assessing decoding involves the reading of mn oemd rcn .rather than isolated wonfs. Students are presented with sentences or paragraphs to rrad aloud. Passage reading provides srudencs with the opponunity to use mnr.mual analysis skills as wdl as other mtthods of decoding. Also, it bemrnrs possible to observe the student's oml rrading flumcy and phrasing and bis or her me m radios mnoemd rm.

Flumq is me ability to perform a skill with both speed and ICCIUICJ. In the ms of "8d.ing,

the term j111tn<Y typi~ly refers to the abili -d text out loud quickly and with n ty to '"" . ral d" . o or fi errors. Fluency m o rca 1ng 1s often rneas e,, usin" curriculum-bastd measurement tech . Ur'd

"o . . 1 n1qu such as one-minute time samp es. cs On traditional reading tests and inv• .

• bo "ntor1 askins students que_suons a ut cornprchens·cs, skills assesses material they have just read ton dents may read the text silently or orally d · Stu. ins on whether decoding skills are al~ epend. srudy. The text may be a se_ntencc, a !)aragra U~dcr a series of paragraphs making up a story

O p ' or

· · L r essa,, Comprehension questions may ~ multiple- h . 1•

I . . b . c 01cc or comp enon items, ut most ryp1cally, the Stu dent provides oral responses to open-ended •

reh . . ques. tions. Comp ens1on questions may probe th student's undeistanding of the literal meanin ~ the passage or require inferential thinking 8 ~ critical analysis (Bartel, 1986b). For example

811

dents may be asked ro recall the details of th; ;:: sage, remember a sequence of events, State th main ideas, ~lain the meaning of vocabwar; words, make Judgments, draw conclusions

0 d . ' r ~um i eas or amons. .

~e ~ility to use read~ng skills in everyday siruaoons 1s an area rarely mduded on measures of reading performance; informal techniques are needed to evaluate srudems' ability to apply their skills in decoding and comprehension to real reading casks. Reading is a useful skill only when the student is able to read quickly and accunrely enough co use it as a cool to gain new informa tion. For example, in everyday life, readers apply their skills when they read signs, posters, letters, roagazio~ and newspapers, television schedules, and the like. These important applications of reading should noc be neglected in assessment.

C11rmrt Practias

In schools today, the assessment of reading achieve ment is common practice in both general and spe cial eduarion. Because of the high interest in reading and the romplexicy of this skill area. • 8ffllt number and variety of measures and uch· niqucs are available t0 mess reading petformanct·

Academic achievement tests cypially include one or more sulxcsts designed t0 evaluare Stll"

dena· mastaJ ex reading skills. Tb.is is aue both

~J• ,.., • '-

roup-administered achievement measures for cb~ g "eneral education and for the individual

ed in o . "al ed ll~cs preferred in spec1d ~bcadti~n. The school c rforrnance measlures escn e . m Chapter 11 pe ncain at east one readmg achievement ell'h co

ea5ure- d ead" J1l Norm-referenc: r _mg tests are more . eedY related to tn~truct1~nal planning. Some

d_ar called diagnostte reading tests, these meas ciJ1leS rvey several subskills within the broad area ores su d "fy "fi f reading to i ent1 spec1 1c strengths and weak- o Because these tests are norm-referenced, nesses. h "d .

• £"0 rmation t ey prov1 e 1s comparative. cbe ,m, f f ead"

A number o o r •~g tescs are available, and chese vary somewhat 1dn t~e range of skills cbeY assess. Some tescs are ~signed for compre h nsive assessment of the reading process and . e Iude measures of several of the important read- 1nc 1 . h --'--. skills. One examp e 1s t e Wouuiuc:k Reading ;~tery Tt.Sts-Third Edition. Other measures con centrate on a particular component of reading. There are testS that assess only comprehension skills, others that assess only word recognition skills, and still others that evaluate reading flu ency. On some measures, oral reading is the con cern, whereas on others it is silent reading. The majority of reading tescs are administered indi vidually to allow testers the opportunity to observe srudencs' performance.

Another type of measure often used in read ing assessment is the informal reading inventory. Reading inventories are made up of graded word lists and graded reading selections. For instance, an inventory might contain a series of word lists and passages ranging from a primer reading level up to grade 8 reading level. Students begin by reading material ac the lower grade levels; they continue reading until the material becomes too difficult to decode and/or to comprehend. These measures are grade-referenced, not norm-referenced. The Standard of comparison is the grade level of the material the student is reading, not the perfor mance of other studencs. Several informal reading inventories are available.

Inventories are only one type of informal strategy used in reading assessment. There are a greac many informal assessment tools for reading, and these represent all of the standard types of measures and techniques. Among the most

CHAPTER 13: READING 3 5 3

commonly used are criterion-referenced tests of specific reading objectives, error analysis of stu dents' oral reading performance, teacher check lists, diagnostic teaching, and clinical reading interviews. Informal techniques are also used to investigate the classroom learning environ ment and its relationship to students' reading performance.

Table 13-1 provides a listing of several of the reading measures used in special education. Each is categorized by type--formal test, informal reading inventory, criterion-referenced test, or curriculum-based measure--and information is included about the grades or ages for which each measure is intended and whether administration is group or individual. In addition, the table notes if the measure is designed to focus on the assessment of decoding skills, comprehension skills, or both.

This chapter describes each of the major strat egies used in schools today for the assessment of reading. Formal reading tests are discussed first, and the next sections introduce three of these. Included are a comprehensive measure of reading, the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests-Third Edition and two measures that concentrate on one major reading skill, the Gray Oral Reading Tests-Fifth Edition and the Test of Reading Comprehtnsion Fourth Edition. The following sections describe formal measures of phonological processing, fol lowed by informal reading inventories and other informal assessment strategies.

: A Breakpoint Practice 13 .1 V Click here to check your understanding of ,

considerations regarding the assessment of reading, i

WOODCOCK READING MASTERY TESTS-THIRD EDITION

The Woodcock Rt.ading Afastery Tats-Third Edition (WRAIT™-3) is a norm-referenced measure that is used co pinpoint students' strengths and weak nesses in reading. The original version of this tnt was published in 197 3 and rrvi5ed in 1987; another version with updated norms wu pub lished in 1998. According co iu manUJl, the

I. »

A B

L E

B --

1 V

I A

ea su

re s o

f R .c

ad in

. T

Y P

E O

G R

O U

P O

S K

IL i.

A R

E A

(S )

A S

S E

S SE

N .i

\M B

" 'U

T H

O R

) A

G E

S O

R G

R A

D E

M E

A S

U R

IN D

IV ID

U A

D E

C O

D IN

C O

M P

R E

II E

N S

IO N

A ..

.J yt

" "

1 R

ea di

ng l,

n, m

tq ry

( l~

h e

d .)

ri m

er to

g ra

d e

9 n

In d

iv id

u al

i (W

o o

d s&

M ~

. 2

0 1

~ )

fu n

tt io

o in

g l

ev el

B R

JG A

N C

E 9

~ sa

n ,,

en t o

f B as

ic S

k il

ls -

K r

o g

ra d

e 8

R .T

d iv

id u

R m

.s d

, S

p a

n u

h E

di ti

on (

B ri

g an

ce , 2

0 0

7 )

' B

R IG

A N

C E

• C

om pr

eh m

si ve

ln vm

tq ry

o f B

as ic

S ki

ll s-

P re

-K c

o G

ra d

e 9

C R

In d

iv id

u al

(B ri

g an

ce , 2

0 1

0 b

)

C J.

,,. ,.,

,,, ,,,

~ a,

,_ ,,,

of R

ea di

ng P

ro a

u a

ra d

es 1

-9

IR J

In d

iv id

u al

( S

~ ~

& A

ll en

, 2

0 0

0 )

fu n

ct io

n in

g l

ev el

C t.

nr vo

,, , R

w .u

li ng

l n

vm to

ry --

T tw

/f th

E d

it u

P re

p ri

m cr

t o

g ra

d e

8 IR

I In

d iv

id u

(W h

ee lo

ck &

am p

b el

l, 2

0 1

3 )

fu n

ct io

n in

g l

ev el

D i,,

,g r,

as ti

, R .-

/i ,r

g S

'4 lt

.t (

S p

ac h

e, 1

9 8

1 )

G ra

d es

1 --

8 N

R T

d iv

id u

fu n

ct io

n in

g l

ev el

D u

rr el

l A -l

y si

s o

f R ea

di ,r

g D

if f ta

d ty

-T h

ir d

E di

ti o,

r G

ra d

es l

-6

N R

In d

iv id

u al

(D u

rr cl

J &

au cr

so o

, 1

9 8

0 )

D :f

W 4m

k /1

1d iu

lt on

o f l

u s k u

r ly

L iu

r. ry

S ki

ll s

G ra

d es

K -6

B M

d iv

id u

(G o

o d

K am

in sk

i, 1

9 9

6 )

E .k

w tJ

// Sh

,, ,,

l! e,

R ,-

/i n

g ll

ln lf

fl to

ry -S

ix th

E d

il io

P re

p ri

m er

c o

g ra

d e

9 IR

I In

d. iv

id u

(S h

an k

er &

kw al

l, 2

0 1

3 )

fu n

ct io

n in

g l

ev el

E ng

li. sh

-E .r

jk lii

ol R

,- /i

n g

ln 1J

nt to

ry fo

r th

e C

la ss

ro om

re p

ri m

er c

o g

ra d

e 9

IR I

In d

iv id

u al

(F ly

n t &

o o

te r,

1 9

9 9

) fu

n c ti

o n

in g

l ev

F ly

nt -C

oo tN

R tJ

U ii

ng ln

vm tq

ry fo

r th

t C la

ss ro

o m

- P

re p

ri m

er c

o g

ra d

e IR

1 In

d iv

id u

a l

F if

th E

.J it

io n

(F ly

n t &

C o

o te

r, 2

0 0

4 )

1 2

f u

n ct

io n

in g

l ev

F o

n rw

l R u

d in

g In

vm 1o

ry (

W ie

d er

h o

lt ,

1 9

8 6

) A

g es

7 -1

N R

Jn d

jv id

u al

G 41

a- M

cK il

lo p-

H or

ow it

z R

ea d

in g

D ia

gn os

ti c

T ~

t G

ra d

es 1

-6

N R

fu d

jv id

u al

at es

, M cK

il lo

p , &

o ro

w it

z, 1

9 8

1 )

G il

a w

n 0

,- a/

R ea

di ng

T u

t (G

il m

o re

& G

il m

o re

, 1

9 6

8 )

G ra

d es

1 --

8 N

R T

d jv

id u

a l

G ,-

ay D

ia g,

,o st

ic R

ea di

,r g

T u

ts --

S ea

m d

E di

ti ot

t (B

ry an

c. W

ie d

cr h

o lc

. & : B

ry an

c. 2

0 0

4 )

A g

es 6

-1 3

R T

d jv

jd u

a J

T A

B L

E 1

3 --

a n

u i,

r u

-~, I

S K

II L

A R

E A

(S )

A S

S E

S S

E D

T Y

P E

O P

R O

U P

O R

' N

A M

E (A

U T

H O

R )

A G

E S

O R

G R

A D

E S

E A

S U

R E

• lN

D M

D U

.A L

E C

O D

IN G

O M

P R

E H

E N

S IO

G ra

y O

ra l R

u zd

in g

T u

ts -F

if th

E di

ti on

ie d

er h

o lt

& B

ry an

t. 2

0 1

2 )

.A ge

s 6

-2 3

R T

d iv

id u

G ra

y S

ik n

t R ea

Ji n

g T

u ts

( W

ie d

er h

o lt

B la

lo ck

. 2

0 0

0 )

.A ge

s 7

-2 6

R T

d iv

id u

al o

r X

ro u

H ud

so n

E dm

:a ti

on S

ki ll

s /m

,m to

ry (

H u

d so

n . C

ol so

G ra

d es

K -1

C R

In d

iv id

u al

el ch

. B an

il co

w sk

i. &

eh ri

n g

. 1

9 8

9 )

In fo

rm al

R ea

Ji n

g /m

,, n

,r o

ry -E

ig h

th E

di ti

P re

p ri

m er

c o

g ra

d e

IR I

In d

iv id

u al

o e

B u

rn s.

2 0

1 0

) 1

2 f

u n

ct io

n in

g l

ev el

M on

it or

in g

B as

ic S

ki ll

s P

ro gr

es s:

B as

ic R

e a

d in

g -

G ra

d es

1 -7

B M

d iv

id u

Se cr

m d

E di

ti on

( F

u ch

s. H

am le

tt , &

u ch

s, 1

9 9

7 )

R ea

di ng

M is

cu e

I, w

en to

ry -S

ec o

n d

E di

ti on

ra d

es 1

-8 +

fu n

c- JR

I In

d iv

id u

(G o

o d

m an

. W at

so n

, &

B u

rk e.

2 0

0 5

) ci

o n

in g

le ve

SI M

so n

O r4

' R ea

di ng

T u

t- T

h ir

d E

di ti

P re

sc ho

ol t

o a

d u

N R

In d

iv id

u al

lo ss

oo &

. N ic

h o

ls o

n .

2 0

0 2

)

St an

da rd

iz ed

R ea

di ng

I m

,, m

to ry

-S ec

on d

E di

ti on

( 2

n d

e d

.A ge

s 6

-1 4

· N

R T

ew co

m er

. 1

9 9

9 )

In d

iv id

u al

St an

fo rd

D ia

gn on

ic R

ea di

ng T

es t-

F o

u rt

h E

di ti

G ra

de s

1 .5

-1 3

R T

ro u

(K ar

ls en

& . G

ar d

n er

, 1

9 9

5 )

St ie

gl it

z In

/a n

n al

R ea

di ng

I n

ve n

to ry

-T h

ir d

E di

ti on

re p

ri m

er to

g ra

d e

9 IR

I In

d iv

id u

(S ti

eg li

tz .

2 0

0 2

) fu

n ct

io n

in g

l ev

Te st

o f E

ar ly

R ea

di ng

A .h

il it

y- -T

h ir

d E

di ti

.A ge

s 3

-8

N R

In d

iv id

u al

ei d

. H

re sk

o, &

am m

il l,

2 0

0 1

)

T u

t o f R

ea di

ng C

om pn

he ns

io n-

F ou

rt h

E di

ti on

ge s

7 -1

N R

In d

iv id

u al

, X

ro w

n . W

ie d

er h

o lt

, &

H am

m il

l, 2

0 0

8 )

sm al

l g ro

u p

T u

t o f W

or d

R ea

di ng

E ff

i. im

cy (

T or

ge se

n. W

ag n

er .

G ra

d es

1 t

o 1

2 +

, a ge

s N

R T

d iv

id u

R as

h o

tt e.

2 0

1 2

) 6

-2 5

W oo

dc od

t-j oh

ru on

1 11

D it:

1g no

st ic

R M

d in

g B

t:1 ttn

-y

G ra

d es

K -1

6 .9

, ag

N R

In d

iv id

u al

oo d

co ck

. M at

he r.

& Sc

hr an

k. 2

0 0

4 )

4 co

9 0

W ~

R t4

di ng

M m

tn -y

T u

ts -T

h ir

d E

di ti

G ra

d es

K -1

2 . a

ge s

5 N

R T

d iv

id u

\> I

(W oo

dc oc

k, 2

01 1)

7 9

-1 1

R T

= no

rm -r

d" uc

nc cd

te st

. / R

I= in

fo rm

al in

vc nc

or y,

C R

T =

cr ic

cr io

n- rc

fc rc

J1 cc

d tc

sc , a

nd C

B M

= cu

rr ic

ul um

-b as

ed m

ea su

re .

356 PARTN: ASS~OFACADEMICSKD.lS

WOODCOCK READING MASTERY TESTS-REVISED/ NOR/tfA.TIVE UPDATE (WRMT-RINU)

R. W. Woodcock (2011)

Type: Norm-rcfcrmctd test

Major Cont~nt Areas: Reading readiness, basic reading skills (word identification and word attack), word and passage comptthcnsion

Type of Administration: Individual

Administration Tune: lO to 30 minlltCS

Age/Grade Levels: Grades K-12, ages~ through 79-11

Types of Scores: Gnde and age equivalents, pm:encile ranks, standard scores, and Relative Performance Index scores for subtms and clusws

Technology Aids: Q Global

Typial Uses: A broad.based trading teSt for the identifiatioo of strengths and weaknesses in reading skill devdopmeot

Cautions: Reliability coefficicms for sema1 reliability cypes should be looked at with caution when coefficient numbm &.11 below the comfortable level. Publisher: Pearson {Jtimo,rdiair41.at1)

WRMT™-3 could be used for clinical assessment and diagnosis, individual program planning, selection and placement, and research.

Two puallel forms of the WRAff- are available: Form A and Form B.

• Phonological Awamzm. Test taker hears sound, syllable, or word and identifies or names one of four illustrations or words, depending on the section. Thircy-rhree items across five sections include First S011nJ Matching, IAt Sound Match ing, Rhyml Prodmtion, Bltnding and Deletion. A. score of O or 1 is achieved.

• Listening Comprthe,uwn. Tat taktr liJtens to ptJJI4gts that (Jf't either rt4d by the examiner or played from 4n t111dio CD. They then re.sponJ to ittmS rtgarding the passages. A O or 1 is t11rntd for tad, of the 27 ittms.

• utttr ldmtif 1(4/ion. Individual letters are arranged in rows, and the student must say the name (or sound) of each. Letters appear in upper• and lowercase, in manuscript and cursive, and in a variety of type styles. Test raker receives a score of O or 1 on 17 items.

• Wont' Identification. Students are shown rows of individual words (e.g., is, listen), and they muse pronounce ea.ch of the 46 items within about 5 seconds. A score of O or 1 is achieved.

• Rapid A11to111atic Naming. Test taker naoo 36 items as rapidly as possible. The time t4ken to nmnt itenu, as well as number of errors an mnsidered in this st1btest.

• Oral Reading Fluency. Test taker reads p(ISsagel pass4ges and is timed by examiner w~ alro mrds errors. Words read correctly in 10 s«onds is mtas11rtd in the score.

• Word Attack. Nonsense words and syllables (e.g., ift, /11ndy) are presented instead of real words. The student reads each of the 26 items aloud for a score of O or 1 per item.

• Word Comprehension. This subtest includes three pares. On Antonyms, the student reads a word aloud and supplies its opposite. On Synonyms, the student reads a word and supplies a word that means the same. On Analogies, the Stu•

dent reads a row of three words representing an incomplete analogy

(e.g,, mothe_r-big, baby-___ ) and sup- . che rniss1ng word. Each response to the

PJteS · d O 1 . 1115 15 score as a or . 86 ,ce h . Th' b e Compre enszon. is su test uses a doze

, fll.fS~ure to assess comprehension skills. The pro~ nt is presented with a brief passage with scu e ord omitted. The student reads the pas one VI

Silently and then attempts to supply the sage E . . 'ng V1ord. as1er passages are accompanied m1ss1 f

draVlings. Each o the responses to 38 items by •ves a score of O or 1. rece1 The WRMr'™-3 is designed for students

kindergarten through high school, but frot11 children and nonreaders may experience Young h ad' b . ss only on t e re mess su tests. Engltsh- succe . u1 1 . r

uage skills are pamc ar y important ror the fang . d p C ..,, d Comprehension an assage omprehen- wor . L : h d . subcests, 1n wiuc stu ems must supply

s1on • sing words. Students respond orally on all

l]llS .... 1 b . . . . ed WRMT" .. -3 su tests; no wrmng 1s requ1r .

Technical Quality Norming was carried out with a sample of 3,360 individuals ages 4-6 to 79-11 across 45 states. Of those participants, 2,600 were students in kinder garten through grade 12. Approximately half of

· che students were males and half were females. The sample was selected to resemble the U.S. population as reflected in 2010 U.S. Census data. The sample appears to resemble the nation as a whole in terms of geographic region, parental education level (an indicator of socio economic status), and race or ethnic group. Also, the sample included K-12 students who receive services in special and gifted education. Students with learn ing disabilities in reading and intellectual disabil ities were included.

In evaluating technical quality, it is also important to consider the reliability and validity of a test. Internal consistency reveals average means across age and grade groups in the .90s. Alternate forms reliability was performed between 9.3 and 19.5 days. Reliability coefficients were .84 to ,94 for cluster scores and .62 to .93 for test scores. Test-retest scores for cluster scores ranged from ,83 to .97, but test scores ranged from .51 to ,95. lnterscorer reliability was very high at .99

CHAPTER 13: READING 3 5 7

(Flowers, 2011). Concurrent validity of the ~RM~™-3 was studied by examining its rela tionship to the reading tests including the W]-lll, WRMT-R-NU, KTEA-II, RPI, CTOPP, and WIAT-III.

Administration Considerations

Qualification B is required for the administration of this test (i.e., specialized degree). Examiners should study the test manual, administer at least two practice tests, and be observed and evaluated by an experienced examiner. Practice activities for administration, scoring, and interpretation are provided in the WRMT™-3 manual. The WRMT™ -3 is a relatively easy test to administer, although scoring is somewhat complicated.

Each test indicates a starting point. The basal rule for most tests is three correct items, and not necessarily consecutive. The ceiling rule is four consecutive incorrect items. If a basal is not achieved, the examiner is instructed to go back to the previous starting point. It is not necessary to administer all subtescs of the WRMT™-3; the tester can select any portion of the battery that is of inter est. Subtests may be administered in any order.

Results and Interpretation

The WRMT™ -3 offers a variety of scores. For each subtest, it is possible to obtain standard scores, grade equivalent, age equivalent, percentile rank, Relative Performance Index (RPI), and Growth Scale Value (GSV). The RPI score is a ratio; for example, an RPI of 85/90 indicates that the student is expected to perform tasks at 85 percent mastery that average students of his or her age or grade would perform at 90 percent mastery. Several other types of scores are available, including T-scores, sta nines, normal curve equivalents, and standard scores with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. It is also possible to construct confidence intervals around scores so that RPI, percentile rank, and standard scores are expressed as ranges.

Subtest scores can be combined into cluster scores. The Readiness Cluster is made up of the three readiness subtests; the Basic Skills Cluster consists of the Word Identification and Word ·Attack subtescs; and the Reading Comprehension Cluster, of the two comprehension subtests. The

3 5 8 PART rv: ~ESSMEJITT OF ACADEMIC SKJU5

Total Reading Cluster is a global score for che five rrading achievement cesrs. The same cypes of scores that arc available for subtescs can be com- puced for dusters. . .

Error analysis is expanded in this new ve~1o_n of rhe WRMT™-3. Item-level error analysis 1s available for Passage Compnhnuio'fl, Listeni11g C(J"1- prehm1io11 and Phono/i,gical Awarrnm. lntnutem error analysis is available for Word A.tt(l(k and Word !de111ific11tion. It is also possible to compare performance in different reading skill areas.

Further information about strengths and weaknesses can be gathered by analyzing smdents' responses co specific cesc items. Results of ~he WRMT™-3 help the professional co determine the srudenr's current levels of achievement in reading readiness, basic reading skills, and ~om prehension. These resultS are most useful for iden tifying areas of strengths and. edu~tional needs. They also provide valuable d1rect100 for further assessment. Informal strategies are used to ru:er investigate weaknesses suggested by WRMT -3 results and to probe skills not assessed.

GRAY ORAL READING TESTS (5TH ED.) The GrtJJ Oral RMJing Tests-Fifth Edition (GORT-5) assess students' ability to read pas sages aloud quickly and accurace~y with a_dequa~e comprehension. Toe current version of chis test IS

the fourth update of a popular measure developed by William s. Gray (196~)- Accor?ing . co the manual, che GORT-5 is designed to 1den~1fy sru dencs with problems in reading, decemune sru dencs' strengths and weaknesses, and document progress in reading.

Two alcemate forms of the GORT-5 are available: Forms A and B. Each contains 16 reading passages chat increase in difficulty, ~nd each passage is followed by five comprehension questions. The task remains the same through out the cesc. The srudent reads the passage aloud as the tester records errors and times the srudenc. Then the tester reads open-ended comprehension questions. Several types of questions are asked, including those chat assess literal, inferential, . critical, and affective comprehension.

ENHANCEDetext Video Example 1 3 .1

'-c----=;;;;;:;;-4-

· -- :;;.,--.--,

. -...

Watch this video to see administrator and teachers in action in a ream meeting. Teachers discuss student achielement across class /Mis regarding reading.

The G0RT-5 is designed for students ages 6--0 co 23-11, and English-language skills are a necessity. Writing is not required; all student responses are oral.

Tech11ical Q11ality

The GORT-5 was standardized with 2,556 students from 33 states. The sample appears to approximate the national population in terms of geographic region, gender, urban-rural residence, race, ethnic ity, and family income. Students with disabilities were also included in the normative group.

Internal consistency reliability is adequate for all scores on the G0RT-5, as is the alternate form reliability. Test-retest reliability average coeffi. cients are also between .82 and .90. lnterrater reliability average coefficients ranged from .7 to .88 (Hall & Tannebaum, 2012). Concurrent valid ity was srudied by examining the relationship between results from various editions of the GORT and those from five ocher measures of read ing. In general, moderate correlations were found.

Administration Considerations

Because there is only one type of task on the GORT-5, administration is straightforward. Sug gested starting points are provided by grade level

CHAPTER 13: REJ.DING 359

GRAY ORAL READING TESTS (5TH ED,) (GORT-5)

J. L. Wiederholt & B. R. Bryant (2012)

'J'ype: Norm-referenced test .

•• ·or Content Areas: Oral reading rate, accuracy, fluency, and comprehension ~•111 • • I d. 'dual

f .A.dmin1strauon: n 1v1 'J'ype O .

. -lstration Tune: 15 to 45 minutes ;.dmhu

/Grade Levels: Ages 6-0 to 23-11 Age 'fypCS of Scor~s: Percentile ranks, standard scores, Oral Reading Index

h Otogy Aids: NIA 'fee n

. al Uses: Identification of strengths and weaknesses in oral reading skills 'I'yplC . dons: The GORT-5 is a measure of oral reading skills; some students show better comprehension

eau ·1 I F th 'nfi . · h reading s1 ent Y· ur er 1 ormauon ts needed about the relationship of this test to other measures

91 en l d · ·a1 ed · of reading common y use m spec1 ucauon.

publisher: PRO-ED (www.protdinc.com)

• a table on the examiner booklet. The Compre :nsion Score basal and ceiling are based on the student's performance on the comprehension questions following each passage. In contrast, the Fluency Score basal and ceiling are determined by considering the rate at which the student reads the passage (9 or 10 on two consecutive passages) and the number of oral reading errors he or she makes (0, 1, or 2 on two consecutive passages).

For each passage administered, the tester reads a sentence or two about the story as motiva tion and then tells the student to begin reading orally from the appropriate page in the Student Book. When the student has completed the pas sage, the tester asks open-ended comprehension questions and reads these aloud as the student looks on. The examiner scores either a 0 or 1 for the response to question. When the student is reading orally, the tester must do two things: (1) record any errors the student makes, and (2) time how many seconds it takes the student to read each passage.

In terms of recording errors, a slash mark (/) is used to denote deviations from the printed page.

A slash is made on each word that is not read correctly and in the space between words when errors such as additions, repetitions, or self corrections occur. Each word and space can account for only one error. The student's response is written above the written word. Special notations are also identified for substitutions, additions, omissions, repetitions, reversals and self-corrections. If the student hesitates, the word is supplied by the tester and counted as an error. Students are allowed 10 seconds to sound out a word but only 5 seconds if there is no audi ble attempt to read the word.

Results and Interpretation

Each passage on the GORT-5 produces four raw scores. The Comprehension raw score is simply the number of comprehension questions answered correctly. The Rate raw score is based on the time the student needed to read the passage~ the Accu racy raw score reflects the number of times the student deviated from the text. Both Rate and Accuracy raw scores range from 1 to 5~ they are

360 PARTN: ~ENTOFACADEMICSKIUS

determined from tables that accompany ch, pas sages. The Fluency nw sco~ is simply the sum of the Rate and Accuracy scores.

TotaJ Test Rate, Accuracy, Fluency Score, and Comprehension Scott rmtlts are then converted to percenrile ranks and standard sco~. Standard scores are disrribured with a ffll!ID of 10 and a

standard deviation of 3. Th, Oral Rl!lding Index (ORI) is a combined scor, of Flu,ncy and Comprehension scaled scores. Other standardized scores include age equival,nts, grade equivalencs, and scaled scores (Mullis, 2012).

An important feature of the GORT-5 is the procedure it provides for analysis of student errors or miscues. A portion of th, protocol is used to record each substitution error and categorizt the way in which it was similar to the ten word. This system is based on the work of the Goodmans (Goodman, 1969, 1976; Goodman & Burke, 1972; Goodman, Watson, & Burke, 2005). Types of mi~ include errors similar in meaning to the text word, errors similar in grammatiaJ func tion, and errors with graphidphonemic similarity. Errors due to multiple sources and self-corrections are also noted. The number and percentage of each type of miscue are then determined. For example, out of 10 miscues on a particular passage, 5 (or 5 0 percent) may have involved words with similar meanings, and 7 (or 70 percent) words with sirru lar grammatiaJ functions. The GOKI-5 prococol provides space for recording information about other types of miscues (omissions, additions, dia:

lecrical variations, and reversals) as well as obser

vations of other reading behaviors. The GORT-J is a useful measure for analyz

ing students' skills in oral reading. The GORT-5 may underestimate the comprehension skills of

those srudenrs for whom silent reading improves

understanding. Results of the GORT-5 provide

information about the strengths and weaknesses

related to oral reading, and they are best used co

identify areas needing further assessment.

Another Gay measure is available if silent

reading skills are of in reresr. The GrtrJ Si/mt Rtlld ing Ttits (Wiederholt & BWock, 2000) for ages 7--0

ro 25-11 are similar in format ro the oral reading resr: students read paragraphs silently, then answer

comprehension questions. Also of note is the G,41 Dillpostic Rlllliing Tests-S~nJ Edition (Bryant,

Wiederholt, & Bryant, 2004). This set of measllrts messes both oral and silent reading and also includes ~eral subtescs that evaluate students' d«oding skill~. _Subtests of,GDRT-2 are Lttter/ Word Recognmoo, Phonetic Analysis, Readin Vocabulary, Meani ngfuJ Reading, and three su: plemental subcests (Listening Vocabulary, Rapid Naming, and Phonological Awareness).

A Bl'Nkpoint Practice 13,2 V elide here to check your undersranding of individJal

reading assessment.

TEST OF READING COMPREHENSION (3RD ED.)

The Test of Reading Comprehemion-Fourth Edition (TORC-4) does not attempt to measure all aspects

of the ~ding process. Instead, it emphasizes comprehension skills, silent reading, and knowl edge of word meanings.

The TORC-4 contains five subtests. lnstruc. tions for each subrest are read to the student, and most subtests include one or two demonstration items. The student reads the test questions silently and then records responses on a separate answer sheet. The five subrests are used to deter mine the Reading Index, an index of general read. ing comprehension ability.

• Relational Vocah11/ary. The student is presented with three stimulus words that are related in some way. He or she then considers four possi ble responses an.d chooses two that relate co the stimulus words.

• SenltTl(t Completion. Students silently read single sentences wi ch two missing words.

From a list of word pairs they select the appropriate response to complete the sentences.

• Paragraph Comtnldion. Sentences that make up

a paragraph are listed in random order. The srudenr's task is to determine the sequence in

which the sentences should appear. • Text Comprehension. Students read paragraph

selections and answer five multiple-choice

questions about each. The questions require

--------------------:3-;-;61 ~ CHAPTER 13: READING

1esT OF READING COMPREHENSION- FOURTH EDITION (TORC--4) V. L. Brown,J. L. Wiederholt, & D. D. Hammill (2008)

• Norm-referenced test ,rype· s·1 --.1• . r Content Areas: 1 ent •~=mg comprehension ~JO . . I d' 'd al of Administration: n 1v1 u or small group ,rype. • •-tion 'lime: 4~ minutes or less ~drrun1s ... ~

Grade Levels: Ages 7~ to 17-11

~s of Scores: Percentile ranks, standard scores, Reading Comprehension Index (RO); age and grade uivalents

eq rnputer Aids: NIA

Co . al Uses: Identification of strengths and weaknesses in the development of comprehension skills and 'fyplC d . knowledge of wor mearungs

Cautions: The TORC-4 is a measure of silent reading comprehension. To participate in TORC-4, aaministration and students must be able to work independently.

publisher: PRO-ED (www.proedinc.com)

students to select the best_ tide for the passage, recall details, and make mferences and nega tive inferences. , Contextual Fluency. Students are allowed

three minutes to identify single words in a series of passages. Passages are presented without punctuation or spaces in uppercase letters.

The TORC--4 is designed for students ages 7--0 to 17-11. The manual points out that, because the TORC--4 requires only silent reading, it is appropriate for students who speak a dialect, for those with articulation problems, and for deaf students. Students must be able to work indepen dently. They answer all questions by writing. Proficiency in taking tests is expected because students write their answers on a separate answer sheet.

Technical Quality

The standardization sample for the fourth edition of the TORC consisted of 1,942 students from 14 states. The sample appears to approximate the national school-age population in terms of sex,

urban-rural residence, geographic region, race, and ethnicity. Students with disabilities who were enrolled in general education classes were included; for example, students with learning dis abilities make up 6 percent of the norm group.

Coefficient alpha is .9 or higher for all sub tests except the timed subtest, which does not receive a coefficient. Test-retest reliabilities were .8 for combined scores. lnterracer reliability from two scorers was above .9. The TORC-4 was com pared to four other reading tests. Results indicate a moderate relationship between TORC results and those of other measures of reading.

Administration Considerations Administration of the TORC--4 requires no spe cial training. However, in learning to administer this test, the manual recommends that profession als should administer the test to at least three dif ferent individuals and be observed by someone who is experienced in test administration, scor ing, and interpretation.

The TORC--4 is quite easy to administer. The tester reads the instructions for the subtest to the student, administers available demonstration

- ·- 362 PART IV; ASSESSMENT OF ACADEMICSKW.5

items, and then allows the student to work inde pendently. Scudencs begin each subtest with item I and continue until a ceiling is reached. For Sen tence Completion and Relational Voabulary, the ceiling is three errors out of any five consecutive items. There is no ceiling on the Contextual Flu ency subtest; scudencs have 3 minutes. Testers should consult the manual for specific ceiling rules for the Text Comprehension and Paragraph Construction subtests.

Scoring the TORC-4 is somewhat more diffi cult. For example, on the Relational Vocabulary subtest, sruden ts are to mark two responses; credit is given only if borh responses are correct. Raw scores should be calculated carefully, particularly on Paragraph Construction. On this subtest, stu dents can earn 0, 2, 3, 4, or 5 points for each ques tion, depending on the order in which they arrange the sentences to form a para.graph.

l?mdts and Interpretation

Tiie TORC-4 provides standard scores and per centile ranks for each subtest. Subtest standard scores have a mean of 10 and a standard deviation of 3. The Reading Comprehension Index (RCI) is a global score indicating the student's overall skill level in reading comprehension. This score is based on the rcsultS of the five subtests. The RCI is a standard score distributed with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. The RO and submc scores arc plotted on the TORC-4 profile.

More important than classifying scudents' scores in TORC-4 interpretation is the identifica tion of strengths and weaknesses in reading com prehension. The general comprehension subcescs provide information about the student's ability to comprehend silently read material. The diagnostic subtescs assess performance of classroom-relaced

comprehension casks. Of particular inceresc with younger elementary students is skill in reading and following written directions. With older ele

mentary students and those in middle and high

school, content areas become important, particu

larly when students are included in general educa tion classes for these subjeas.

TORC-4 results are helpful in determining

the srudent's current levels of performance in

several different comprehension skills. Informal techniques are then used to gather information about the specific skills that may require educ;. tional intervention. However, comprehension is related to the student's ability to recognize and pronounce words, and the TORC-4 does nor assess decoding skills or oral reading speed as does the G0RT-5. Also, it~~ not as compiete a measure as the \\1/RIHT -3. However ·

h . f , It

addresses ot er important aspects o the readin process. Among the TORC-4's features are th! use of a standard classroom task to assess site

d. I . I . 1 · nt rea 1ng com pre 1ens1on, t 1e me us10n of a read- ing directions task for younger students, and th provision of standard score results for conten: area vocabulary subtesrs.

ENHANCEDetext Video Example 13,Z Watch this video to see student working with sma/J groups in a reading activity.

MEASURES OF PHONEMIC AWARENESS AND PHONOLOGICAL PROCESSING

In the past decade, several measures of phonolog ical processing have been developed to assess students' phonemic awareness and phonological processing skills-chat is, their awareness of the

sounds chat make up spoken words and their ability to recognize similarities and differences among s~unds. Some measures, such as the Test of PhonologtCal Awarenm-S«ond Edition: PLUS

CHAPTER 13: READING 363

Bl 13ryant, 2004) and the Test of Phono (1o.rge5~11111reneJJ Ski(l.r (Newcomer & Baren- 1og1cd/ zo03), are designed for younger children bllLiJ'l'I• 1 mentary grades. Others, such as the ill the ;;it1e Te.rt of Phonological Proce;sing-2 co111Prt rorgesen, Rashotte, & Pearson, 2013), ('f//igner, priate for both young children and

ages 5-0 to 10-11. The TOPAS contains fo~ subd tests, although only the first two are admin1Ste~e

d · · at1on to students below the age of 6. A m101str

Me ip:r: 0 dents in the elementary, middle, and

older hool grades. high sc Tesl of Phonological Awareness-Second . !:.e PLUS (TOPA-2+) contains two levels,

Ed1110 ~ kindergarten children (ages 5-0 through 011e fo d the ocher for early elementary grade 6-11) an(ages 6-0 through 8-11). The TOPA scud:t~e administered individually or to groups, 2+ c. equires 15 to 45 minutes depending on llfld

1 1t r 1 On both levels, the examiner reads

he eve• . t . . ns as children follow along m a student direct10 b d' . . 1,o0klet. On most su tests, 1rect10ns require that

'Id en attend to a row of four drawings as the chi :ner says the name of the first drawing (the eicaJlll

. ulus figure) and the names of three possi- st1m . d ble response drawings. ~tu . e~ts must the~ mark

h one drawing that 1s s1m1lar to or different t e fi . fi m the stimulus 1gure m some way. co The casks on the kindergarten level of the TOPA-2+ require srudents to locate drawings that begin with the same sound as the stimulus figure or chat begin with a different sound. For example, in the first demonstration item, the stimulus is a drawing of a bat and the three pos sible responses are drawings of a horn, bed, and cup; students are asked to mark the drawing that starts with the same sound as bat. On the Early Elementary level, students must identify draw ings that end with the same sound as the stimulus figure or that end with a different sound. The current edition of TOPA adds a letter-sound cor respondence subtest to each level. On the kinder garten version of the test, students must find the letter that represents the sound made by the tester; on the version for older students, students are asked to write nonsense words pronounced by the tester. TOPA-2+ results include percentile rank scores and standard scores (called ability scores and distributed with a mean of 100 and a Standard deviation of 15 ). . The Te.rt of Phonological Awamress Skills (TOPAS) is appropriate for elementary grade students

requires 20 to 30 minutes, and the tester presents each item orally to the student. .

According to the TOPAS manual, th1s meas- 1 · al conure assesses three important phono ogtc

structs: sound comparison (subtest 1), phone~e blending (subtest 2), and phoneme segmentation (subtests 3 and 4). The four subtests are:

• Subte;t 1: Rhyming. The tester reads an i?com plete sentence emphasizing one word 1~ ~he sentence; the student must supply the missin~ word that rhymes. The manual provides this example: "'I hurt my knee falling out of a

. [tree]" (p. 6). • Subte;t 2: Incomplete Wordr. The tester says a

word with one or more sounds missing; the student must say the whole word. .

• Subte;t 3: Sound Seqr,encing. This task req~ir~s the student to learn associations between mdt vidual speech sounds and colors. As the manual explains, "the child must listen to the sound sequences and arrange colored blocks in a cor responding sequence according to the sound each block represents" (p. 7). The manual notes that this subtest is based on the task used in the Lindamood-Bell Auditory Conceptualization Te.rt (Lindamood & Lindamood, 2004).

• Subtest 4: Phoneme Deletion. The tester says a word and asks the student to repeat the word deleting a specific sound.

Age and grade equivalents, scaled scores, and percentile ranks are available for each TOPAS subtest. An overall test score, the Phonological Awareness Composite, can also be obtained. Sub test scaled scores are distributed with a mean of 10 and a standard deviation of 3; the overall Com posite is a standard score with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15.

The Comprehensive Test of Phonological Proce.rsing-2 (CTOPP-2) is designed for students ages 4--0 through 24-11. Two levels are available, one for ages 4 to 6 and the other for ages 7 and above. Both are based on a model of phonological process ing that contains the following abilities: phono logical awareness, phonological memory (i.e., the temporary storage of phonological information),

364 PA RT IV ASSESSMENT OF ACADOOCSKIU..S

and rapid naming (i.e., che rrtriml of phonologi cal informa1ion from long-term memory).

The CTOPP-2 contains Stven Core subcests and two Supplemencal subtesrs for ages 7 to 24. Each phonological processing ability is assessed by rwo Core subresrs; the Supplemental subtests provide additional information on phonological awareness, if desired. The Core subresrs are as follows:

Pho110/(Jgical Awa,wm

• Elision. Srudems repeat a word and then must say what remains when one or more sounds m deleted from the word.

• Blending Wordr. When srudencs hear rwo or more sounds that make up a word, they must say the word.

• Phontni4 /Jolarion. Srudencs isolate sounds within words.

Phonological Me111or;r

• Mm1ory for Digits. Scudenrs repeat numbers from memory; the digits are presented at the rate of rwo per second

• Nonword Rtpttitiott. Students listen to nonsense words from , to 15 sounds long and then repeat them.

Rapid SJmbo/ic Naming • Rapid Digit Naming. Students must say the

name of random numbers on a page. • Rapid Leiter Naming. Students must say the

name of random letters on a page.

Similar measures are included on the CTOPP-2 for younger students. They include nine core testS (Elision, Bltnding Wordr, So11nd Aflltroing, Aft1TIQl'J

/or Digits, Nonword Rtpdilion, Rapid Digit Naming, Rapid Lerttr Naming, Rapid Color Naming, Rapid Ohjttt Naming) and one supplemental test (Blmd ing Nonm).

Subtest raw scores can be converted to age and grade equivalencs, percentile ranks, and standard scores (distributed with a mean of l 0 and a standard deviation of 3). Composite scores are determined by combining subtest results. The following Composites are available on both

levds: Phonological Awareness, Phonological Memory, Rapid Symbolic Naming, and Rapid Noosymbolic Naming Composites. On the level for older students, it is also possible to calculate the Alternate Phonological Awareness Composite, if appropriate supplemental subtestS (Blending N1»1wonis, Stg,,unting Words) we.re administered.

Measures such as the TOPA- 2+, TOPAS, and CT0PP-2 assess reading readiness skills, not reading itself. Although information about stu dents' phonological processing abilities may be useful when considering various instructional approaches, it does not shed light on current rtading performance. Measures such as the for mal tests described in the last section and the fluency measUttS and informal reading invento ries, to be discussed next, provide that type of information.

READING FLUENCY MEASURES Reading fluency, or the ability to read with both s~ and accuracy, can be assessed formally with published measures or informally in classrooms with measures that teachers create. One example of a published assessment tool that includes a measure of fluency is the Gray Oral Readings Tuts-Fifth Edition, described earlier in this chapter. The GORT-5 offers Total Test Rate and Accuracy scores that are combined into Total Test Fluency score. These scores are converted into percentile ranks and standard scores, thus allow ing norm-referenced comparisons.

Ocher norm-referenced measures of reading fluency are also available. Among these are the Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency-2 (Mather, Hammill, Allen, & Roberts, 2004) and the Test of Silent Contextual Reading F/uency-2 (Hammil1

Wiederholt, & Allen, 2006). These tests used similar formats. On erurh, srudencs are shown a block of text in uppercase letters with no spaces between words (for example, HERE IS AN EXAMPLE). The task is to draw a vertical line between words. The Contextual Reading Fllltnrj measure presents words in sentences, whereas on the Word Reading measure the words are unrelated. Fluency is assessed by determining the number of lines correctly drawn within a

. ce period, Norms are available for students 1111nu

3· des 1-12. . ill Sf

0 che classroom, teachers can use curriculum-

ed rneasurem~nc (CBM) techniques such as t,:i.s described in Chapter 6 to evaluate how ch~S~ly scudents can ~ccurately decode words in qll

1 ~ reading casks. This type of assessment is con

om d curriculum-based because the reading ·dere

s1 ·ats are randomly selected from chose co be nceri h 1

ltl h during che sc oo year. Tindal and Marston nus c · t'. • • \ 990) provide specmc mst~Ctlons for conduce- ~ a curriculum-based reading assessment. Two • 08. s of a reading passage or word list are pre ,:~; che ceacher's co~y ~ho1d have numbers ac P 'de of che text md1catmg the cumulative cbe s1 d

rd count. The scu enc reads aloud for 1 min- wo and che teacher records errors. To begin, the ~~ d' . ceacher gives these 1rect1ons:

When I say "start," begin reading at the top of this page. If you wait on a word too long, I'll tell you the word. If you come to a word you cannot read, just say "pass" and go on to the next word. Do not attempt to read as fast as you can. This is not a speed reading test. Read at a comfortable rate. At the end of one minute, I'll say "stop." (Tindal & Marston, 1990, p. 148)

Substimcions, omissions, and reversals are counted as errors; words are pronounced by the ceacher (and counted as errors) when the student hesitates for 3 seconds. Additions and self-corrections are not counted as errors; more than one mispro nunciation of the same proper noun is considered only one error.

The teacher scores the CBM by determining the number of words read correctly during the 1-minute time period. Results are typically graphed so that the student's progress can be monitored over time. On the graph, the aim line represents the instructional goal for the student; the trend line is a record of actual progress.

It is possible to develop local norms for curriculum-based measures such as the reading fluency task just described (Howell, Fox, & Morehead, 1993; Tindal & Marston, 1990). By transforming an informal procedure into a norm referenced one, it becomes possible to compare one student's rate to that of typical students in the same classroom or grade level in order to

CHAPTER 13: READING 365

de~ermine if a school performance problem exists. Shinn O 988) describes procedures for norms development.

One example of a commercially available curriculum-based reading measure is the Reading Fluency Progress Monitor (lhnoc, 2006), a compa nenc of the Read Naturally (lhnoc, 2000, 2001, 2003) instructional program mentioned in Chapter 6. This measure is designed co assess stu dents' ability to read connected text quickly and accurately. Students are asked to read a passage aloud for 1 minute while the teacher marks errors. A booklet containing secs of passages is available for each grade from 1 through 8. The teacher determines the number of words read correctly in the 1-minute period. Three timed samples are administered, and the average number of words read correctly is calculated. That value can then be compared to the national norms for grades 1-8 based on the work of Hasbrouck and Tindal (200S). For example, at the grade 4 level, students at the 50th percentile rank read 94 words cor rectly per minute in the fall, 112 words correctly per minute in the winter, and 123 words cor rectly per minute in the spring.

n Breakpoint Practice 13.3 V Click here to check your understanding of individual

reading testing.

INFORMAL READING INVENTORIES Standardized tests are but one of the many types of assessment tools available for the study of stu dents' reading skills. Another popular measure, particularly for classroom use, is the informal reading inventory (IRI). IRis assess both decod ing and comprehension skills. They are made up of graded word lists and reading selections that the student reads orally. The tester notes any decoding errors and records the student's answers to the comprehension questions accompanying each reading selection.

IRis are grade-referenced measures; the word lists and passages are arranged in order of diffi culty according to school grade levels. They are informal measures, and their purpose is to provide

366 PART N : ASSESSMENT OF ACADEMJCSJCllJ.S

information about the srudent's ttading skills in relation to the grade-ll'Vel system of the general school curriculum.

The results obtained from IRls ~ grade level scores. Typically, informal inventories pro vide three reading levels: the Independent Level, the Instructional Level, and the Frustration Level. A student's Independent Level is the level of graded reading materials char can be read taSily with a high degree of comprehension and few errors in decoding. At this level, the student reads independently, without instruction or assistance from the teacher. Reading materials at the stu dent's Instructional Level are somewhat more dif ficult; this is the level appropriate for reading instruction. Materials at the Frustmtion Level are coo difficult for the srudent; decoding errors are too frequent and comprehension too poor for instruction to occur. According to Kjrk, Klieb han, and Lerner (1978), the usual criteria for determining these three reading levels are:

• 98 to I 00 percent word recognition accwacy and 90 to 100 percent accwacy in comprehen sion for the Independent Level;

• 95 percent word recognition accwacy and 75 percent accuracy in comprehension for the Instructional Level; and

• 90 percent or less word recognition accuracy and 50 percent or less accwacy in comprehen sion for the Frustration Level.

In the In/urm1JI Reading ITM11tory-Eigbtb Edition by Roe and Bums (2010), the tester intro duces the wk by reading a sentence that provides a purpose for reading. The student reads the selec tion orally and then responds co eight comprehen sion questions read by the tester. The number and percentage of word recognition and comprehen sion errors made by the student are recorded to determine whether the selection &J1s at the stu dent's Independent, Instructional, or Frustration reading level.

Several published informal reading invento ries are available for classroom use, or profession als can construct their own IRis by selecting reading passages of various difficulty levels from a series of reading textbooks (Gillespie-Silver, 1979; Goodman er al., 200S; Johnson, Kress, & Pikulski, 1987). Designing an IRI requires time

and effort, but the advantage is that locally pre. pared inventories can reflect the reading series used in a particular school or district.

Selecting an 111/omtal Reading Invento,-y

AJI informal reading inventories share several general characteristics. Their major emphasis is oral reading; they use lists of words and reading passages to assess reading skill; and they take both decoding and comprehension into account when determining the student's Instructional Reading Level. However, there are some differences that should be evaluated when selecting an IRI for USe in assessment. Among the factors to consider arc the number of forms provided, whether measures of listening skill and silent reading are included; the number and grade levels of word lists and pas. sages; the types of comprehension questions asked; and the availabili cy of optional tests and other features.

The Analytical Reading Inventory (ARI) Tmth Edition by Woods and Moe (2015) is worthy of note for several reasons. First, it is one of the few inventories that provide a complete descrip tion of the procedures used in development ~d validation. Readability results are presented for each of the passages on the ARI, along with vocabulary diversity scores and information about average passage lengths.

Second, the ARI contains both narrative and expository passages carefully prepared to be inspi rational. In addition, the content of the graded selections is consistent across the three forms of the ART. At the grade 6 level, for example, all passages describe African American inventors or scientists. Because the con tent of a passage affects its appeal to readers, consistency helps to ensure the equivalence of alternate forms.

Third, the ARI provides several types of comprehension questions ranging from chose that require literal thinking about the passage to those in which the reader must make interpreta tions about the text. The four question types (in order, from most to least literal) are retells of fact put information together, connect author and reader, and evaluate and substantiate. At least one of each type of question accompanies each reading passage.

feature, the ARI encourages both fol.lr~h and qualitative analysis of decoding

. ncice.ttve ·ng from the work of the Goodmans qll..,. praWI

c0rs, (Goodman, 197 3a; Goodman & Burke er d 0chers thors of the ARI use the term misc11; sJ1 he au 1972), t f error. Miscues are defined as deviations • 5,ead O •need cexc. All readers make miscues, ill i.e prt ·1 'd ftofll Cl'. ues are not necessan y ev1 ence of a sJ!d tll15~ reading. For example, miscues such as

robletll 1 ~ ct' 00 of the for a do not change the

p bsc1cu che s~ of che cext and thus do not affect

eao1n8 . 111 )lens1on. ,ornPre h ARI, miscues can be analyzed both

0~ c. \1y and qualitatively. Quantitative t1cac1v . h rad' . nal quail . involves followmg c e t mo proce-

~slYs15 unting che different types of errors made duce of co dent (e.g ., omissions, insertions, subsci by ~he ;cu In qualitative analysis, the examiner cut1ons · h miscue, and then determines how sim-

ces eac . .nal O . 11° iscue is to the ong1 text. ne 1mpor- ·1ar che m · · 'la · h · 1 'deration is semantic s1m1 nty-t at 1s,

nc cons1 . . ca h or not the miscue changes the meanmg

het er w 1. xc Figure 13-1 shows a sample passage f cue ce . 0 he ARI with miscues analyzed both quanti- froin C • , 1

. ly and qualitative y. cac1ve eadi . . d . ed

Mose informal r ng mvencones are es1gn for elementary and middle schoo~ students. One

eption is the Informal Reading Inventory ~;hth Edition (Roe & Bu~ns, 2010), which con tains passages from prepnmer to grade 12 level. Another noteworthy measure is the English Espaiiol Reading Inventory for the Classroom (Flynt & Cooter, 1999). It provides narrative and expos itory passages from preprimer to grade 9 levels both in English and in Spanish.Some IRis include supplementary measures. For example, the Ekwall/Shanker Reading Inventory-Sixth Edi tion (Shanker & Ekwall, 2014) provides several strategies for the evaluation of Graded Reading Passages.

Two other measures attempt to make reading inventories less informal. The Standardized Read ing Inventory-Second Edition (SRI-2) (Newcomer, 1999) has set procedures for administration and scoring, information is available about its reliabil ity and validity, and it contains norms for stu dents ages 6 to 14. Students read passages orally

as the examiner records word recognition errors. Students then read the passage silently before

CHAPTER 13: READING 367

answering comprehension questions. Scores are . • Word Rec-available for Passage Comprehension,

ognicion Accuracy, and total test (Reading Quo tient). An optional Vocabulary in Context subteSt

is also available. The Formal Reading Inventory (FRI) (Wiederholt 1986) is a similar norm-

, d fa referenced measure. The FRI is compose O d series of passages chat students read silently an orally; standard score results are available for silent reading, and oral reading miscues can be analyzed informally.

OTHER INFORMAL STRATEGIES Assessment for instructional planning in reading relies on informal strategies, including the info~ mal reading inventories described in the previ ous section. Here the focus is on other types of informal techniques: teacher checklists, err~r analysis, doze and maze procedures, diagno_snc teaching and clinical reading interviews, critenon referenced tests curriculum-based measurement, questionnaires' and interviews, and portfolio assessment.

Teacher Checklists

Checklists are a quick and efficient means of gath ering information from teachers and other profes sionals about their observations and perceptions of students' reading skills. The reading behaviors described on checklists can be of any kind: decod ing, comprehension, oral reading, silent reading, or a combination. Most typically, checklists are designed to identify difficulties in reading or are curriculum checklists used to record and monitor reading skills development. An example of a read ing difficulty checklist appears in Figure 13-2.

Error and Miscue Analysis

One of the most frequently used techniques in the informal assessment of reading is error analysis. This traditional technique dates back to the 1930s when Marion Monroe (1932) described common types of oral reading errors. Error analy sis is a study of the mistakes that students make. Unlike the more general procedure-response analysis-it does not take into consideration both

- 368 PART IV: ASSE5.SMENTOF ACADDIICSKJLLS

fOIII C. I.ML I

Pnor llnowleO&~ 0 Rod 1hr ~ IJ'1d DteOcl - lhl IIOfY 11 1111cM. ,'-'II""' IJ!"II I( t( <11'1

Q. ll""'1"1-JNbtw,l«-f11'-',nwil 0 ... SI{ kH, r 11N I m,l 1161 lllu Mt( WI. D 1111111

o Rudtt...1t-,1two...-and lddmcnto,culftdlctl0n, llt.-4'Jf r,fl Ill /tu lit/ "-kl/NI It I" 41. Q UMl«-fN~l«wlllfl'IPAJMllltlilt'IWh SP. / l.tl11R1 NiJrfAll_.,,w __ *,_

l.wkouL you'll gt( hllr ~r.d • my q,.., _./.,., ,wSC 116 SC'

2 t,u,v m.,d / Thud w .. ~ l tw,ml,and Ihm f yw 111ypup/

.,sc 3 l\'U1pn tho strm. -Oh. nor I shoulod. I f<ll Klllld inAdr, "!lo lo

4 my bt<l /nmdr I w•nted to ay ouL I kn,,,.> that hf wu hull. bul

fl1Jlly 5 ht'd be•II ngh~I I eould get htlplaol I~ I hod lo lwbra ...

,rSC H 6 "Moml o..11• ~•elrd °' I ~ llamf. I !?Md lo fighl

JI Tlr lll1'lf

7 bod. lht l~or,. n...,/.ww. rollirt& doWJ\ iny ~I

~ I 8 bwtrd thrwgh 1hr ~ '1ln ha bom hit. and hr reds Jr4t

....,. ow ........

011111--~ o.-...,..-.tllallltW? .,., .............. __, ..... d .. _,

c ..... ,.... ...... ......,. .. _.._,.,_.1111' .,.,~ ___ ,.._ .......... .,... ...... ...., IN.""" c • ..,..... ...... ,. ... a1--.,'!!'fl ....... ......-,

.!!!!!a!!!!!: Cide Ont

••---flD'Glgaodpa ().1utrU1/ r.-lNpa

FIGURE 13-1

2odlofll¥,plildl1rlg~/--plCI I • dMlt, illlaNd, .... iid'lg/ wrya plCI

Sample Analysis of Miscues from the At111l)'ticaf Rtading lnvmtory

i;.· ·- ·• ........ -_.Tr. L ~ ~ I --- .... N --- !<- ...... E - - -. ... I 110 - "'""-• -- - ...... -.... s ,-,

I A -CM 6 ~ NCM-A'

' ,,,,

IM --" CM

' J/rtrf I - " CM

r ~ r -A CM ------ - - -

- - - - -

~ - .(Most, D few, D 110 ~scues were ar~

lf'Most. 0 few, C 110

siniar to the word In the passap.

miscues were syntacticaDy matched. D Most a(-, D 110 mi~s maintained the IU1hor'a

IIJllnlni,

it'The ~IS democlSllete lhat the reader montou ~menw. .

Fonn C, Level 2

Source: Woods, Mary Lynn; Moe, Alden J., Analytical Reading Inventory: Comprehensive Standards-Based Assessment for All Students Including Gifted and Remedial, 10Th Ed., C 2015. Reprinted and Electronically Reproduced by Permission of Pearson Education, Inc., New York, NY.

~--------------------OlA_PT_li_R_l3_: RE-A-DIN--G-3-6-;::9

_; _______ ~;:: lh - 3 ~c-S~g~;:~~:;~~~ --------

l-r~4i=~~~~~Ge~ne~~ral~~~S~ig;;hit~Voc~;ab~ul~ary;~N~ot~~U~p=to=G=ra=d=e=Leve==I ::J I 5 Phonics Difficulties: Consonants .!!l ~ 6 Phonics Difficulties: Vowels cn

7 Phonics Difficulties: Blends, Digraphs, or Diphthongs '

1 ~

8 Structural Analysis Difficulties Co Cl) I 9 ntractlons Not Known :i ;g s ..

10 Inadequate Ability to use Context Clues i ~ ~ J -- ----------======----============= ~ l·~ i 11 Poor Pronunciation 1ii 1ii ~ CD 12 Omissions .,, ~= ! ! ~~TTT.;::::;:;::::----------------1~-CD ~u:::i 113 Repetitions

:::i i ~ 111 ~ ~r1T1o=~~~~~--------_J-~ Cl)gie 14 Inversions or Reversals !E c S :::i Q r.:rr,;-;=~=-_;.:..:.:.==---------_j 0 :::i o - c 15 Insertions g, 8 c: '51 c: ~t--t--t--t;~::;:-7-----------_J •- i :SE i 16 Substitutions -oa:1 rn Sl a, a>

17 Guesses at Words i ~ ~ ! ~ t.llltlllC: 18 Word-by-Word Reading c5 ~ I § I 19 Incorrect Phrasing i i ~ ~ 20 Voicing, Lip Movements, Finger Pointing, ~ ! '! s and Head Movements u i ii e? ----------------------=------------------------ ii en! ------------------r~- e § ~ s 21 Word Meaning / Vocabulary Knowledge Inadequate a. ·i .!!l CD c: io .~ 22 Comprehension Inadequate ~ ! ! = r. j ~ ----------------------=--=========-============ 1 l·i ~ 23 Low Rate of Speed a. l CD = t-rH--t---~--------~ ... e o 8 ~ 1-2_4-t--t--t--t-ln_ab_il....:ity~to.:..AtJ;..;::.;lu:.:;st.:..:R.:.:ead=.::in~g..:.:Ra=t::.e -----~ g ; ~ -o j

1-! 2

-t--t-+-+-~-i~-h._:.;..t_:_~_:_:_~_;n_!an_at_t_he_Ex_pe_n_se_o_f_k.c_u_ra_cy---11 i 'h Inability to Locate lnfonnation u, a. f= ~ i 28 Underdeveloped Dictionary Skills i J ! -~ f] % <, 29 Written Recall Umited by Spelllng Skill u'i l ~ I j I

FIGURE 13-2 Reading Difficulty Checklist Source: Locating and Correcting Reading Difficulties (8th ed.) by Shanker/Ekwall,@ 2003. Reprinted by permission of Pearson Education Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.

3 7 0 PART IV: ASSES.™ENT OP ACADEMJC SKJlLS

correct and incorrect responses. In reading 8.$SCSS ment, incorrect responses provide information about how the srudent is processing the text and suggest directions for instructional interventions.

Error analysis is generally used to investigate decoding mistakes in oral reading. The first step in conducting an error analysis is to select mate rial for the student to read. That material may be a word list or some sort of connected text. If the teacher is iott-rested in the srudent's ability tO

read common words-words that appear with high frequency in reading books and other text materials-the teacher could select a list like that shown in Table 13-2. This high-frequency word list is Johnson's (1971) updated version of the Dolch Basic Sight Word List (Dolch, 1953). It includes 220 words commonly found in reading texts for the primary grades.

Lists of "survival" reading words are also available. These contain words believed to be nec essary for minimal literacy in today's society. Included are words found on warning signs and notices (e.g., "Danger," "Keep Out; "Poison") and words used to provide information (e.g., "Rest Rooms," "This Way Out," "Restaurant") (Kaluger & Kelson, 1978).

If connected text is the concern, the teacher can choose from the passages provided on informal inventories and some standardized tests, a series of graded textbooks for reading instruaion, or other materials such as content area textbooks or library books on topics of interest. A basal reading series is a good source of reading selections, particularly if the teacher is also interested in determining the srudeoc's instructional reading level. The teacher should gather several levels of graded readers so thac the srudent can begin reading at a level ac which he or she can experience success.

The next seep is to decide what types of responses will be considered errors and how these errors will be classified. In the reading of word lists, mispronunciations and nonpronunciations are cypically viewed as errors. Mispronunciations occur when the srudent decodes a word incor rectly; for eiample, be or she may read who when the rm says how. Mispronunciation errors are often classified by the types of letter sounds in which the misrakes occur: consonant sounds, vowel sounds, blends (e.g., the fust two letters in tree and glass),

d. hs (e g the first cwo letters in ship and 1grap • ·• . cha/le), and diphthongs (e.g_., ~he last two letters 1n

and to)'), Nonpronunc1at1on occurs when the cowdent fails to say a word. If word recognition sru h h . spt-ed is a major concern, t e teac e~ can set a time l·m·t for responding. For example, 1f 2 seconds are I I , ,

tablished as the time limit, correct responses esroduced after the 2-second time period would be p . . scored as nonpronunc1at1ons.

Several cypes of errors can occur when sru. dents read connected text. Most systems of error analysis include at least four classes of errors:

• Additions. The reader adds words or pares of words to the printed text. For example, if the text is "the brown do,g," the reader says, "the big brown dog." .

, St1bstit11tio11s. The reader mispronounces a word or parts of words; this type of error is also called a mispronunciation. For example, if the text is "the small house," the reader says, "the small horse."

, Omissions. The reader fails to pronounce words or pares of words. This error occurs when read. ers skip words, when they hesitate in respond. ing, or when chey say they do not know a word and the teacher supplies it. For example, if the text is "the gnarled old tree," the reader might omit the word "gnarled" and read, "the old uee."

• Reversals. The reader changes the order of the words in a phrase or sentence or the order of sounds within a word. For example, if the text is "There were many seagulls," the reader says, "Were there many seagulls."

Repetitions are another type of reading behav ior considered an error by some professionals, A repetition occurs when the reader repeats a word or a series of words. For example, if the text is "The man walked to the levee," the reader says, ''The man walked to the walked to the levee. h

Ocher behaviors sometimes viewed as errors are disregard of punctuation and poor phrasin8 in oral reading. However, most educators agree that if a student makes and then corrects an error, the error is not counted.

When collecting a reading sample for error analysis, two copies of the reading material are needed: one for the student to read and another

. -.~~--- ~"",:-:' I& ... s:- : . '

~· . ~ ...

~ CHAPTER 13: READING 371

1'J\13LB 13-\cy Word List , h-Freque

l ~ PRIMER FIRST SECOND THIRD efRfMER

~ 45. when 89. many 133. know 177. don't 1. 'fhC 46. who 90. before 134. while 178. does 2.of 47. will 91. must 135. last 179. got 3. And 48. more 92. through 136. might 180. united 4. 'fo 49.no 93. back 137. us 181. left 5. A 50. if 94. years 138. great 182. number 6. In 51. out 95. where 139. old 183. course ?. 'fhat 52. so 96. much 140. year 184. war g, Is 53. said 97. your 141. off 185. until 9.was 54. what 98. may 142. come 186. always 1 o. He 55. up 99. well 143. since 187. away 11, For 56. its 100. down 144. against 188. something 12. It 57.about 101. should 145.go 189. fact l3, With 58. into 102. because 146. came 190. through 14. As 59. than 103. each 147. right 191. water 15. His 60. them 104. just 148. used 192. less 16. 0n 61. can 105. those 149. take 193. public 17. Be 62. only 106. people 150. three 194. put 18, At

19, By 63. other 107. Mr. 151. states 195. thing 20. I 64.new 108.how 15 2. himself 196. almost 21. This 65. some 109. too 153. few 197.hand 22. Had 66. could 110. little 154. house 198. enough 23. Noc 67. time 111. State lSS. use 199. far 24.Are 68. these 112.good 156. during 200. took 25. But 69.two 113. very 157. without 201. head 26. From 70. may 114. make 158. again 202. yet 27. Or 71. then 115. would 159. place 203. government 28. Have 72.do 116. still 160. American 204. system 29. An 7 3. first 117. own 161. around 205. better 30. They 74. any 118. see 162. however 206. set 31. Which 75. my 119. men 163. home 207. told 32. One 76. now 120. work 164. small 208. nothing 33. You 77. such 121. long 165. found 209. night 34. Were 78. like 122. get 166. Mrs. 210.end 35. Her 79. our 123. here 167. thought 211. why 36. All 80. over 124. between 168. went 212. called 37.She 81.man 125. both 169. say 213. didn't 38. There 82. me 126. life 170. part 214. eyes 39. Would 83. even 127. being 171. once 215. find 40. Their 84. most 128. under 17 2. general 216. going 41.We 85.made 129. never 173. high 217. look 42. Him 86. after 130. day 174. upon 218. asked 43. Been 87. also 131. same 175. school 219. later 44. Has 88. did 132. another - 176. every 220. knew Sollret: From "The Dolch List Reexamined" by D. D. Johnson, 1971, The Reading Teacher, 24, pp. 455-456. Copyright 1 971 by the International Reading Association. Reprinted with permission of Dale D . Johnson and the International

Reading Association.

3 7 2 PART fV: ASSEmCENT OF ACADEMJC SKllJ.S

for the reacher to record the student's responses. A standard set of symbols is used for noting errors:

• The symbol " indicates an addition,· the " is placed in the text where the word or word part has been added, and the addition is written above the text. For example,

big "The " brown dog."

• A 111b11i1u1ion is marked by crossing out the mispronounced word and writing the substi tuted word above it. For example,

horse "The small h~e."

• Omi.uions are shown by drawing a circle around the word, word part, or series of words the stu dent left out. For example,

"The~ld tree."

• The symbol Lfl indicates a rrvma/ of words or pares of a word. For example,

"~many seagulls."

• RtjJtli1io111 are marked by drawing an arrow under the word or words repeated. For example,

"The man walked to the levee."

The om step is analysis of the srudeoc's errors. Io the traditional approach co analysis, the professional simply counts the number of errors that occurred in each category. However, it is also necessary to decide which errors are instructionally important for the student under study. Most edu cators would agree that substitutions and omis sions have instructional relevance, but ocher types of errors may be of less concern. Errors such as the addition of an -s ending or an occasional repeti tion usually do nor alter the sense of the passage.

An alternate method of error analysis takes into account the quality of the errors chat readers make. In chis qualitative analysis system, errors are called miscues (Goodman, 1973a, 1973b; Goodman &

Burke, 1972; Goodman, Warson, & Burke, 2005). According m Burke (1973), adultS also make mis

rues often. As noted earlier, miscues are not neces sarily ause for alarm. Efficient reade~ are still able

to mmpreheod the meaning of text because the

types of errors they make tend to preserve meaning.

Inefficient readers, in mntrast, make errors chat change the meaning of the rext (Goodman, 1973b).

Figure 13-2 provides an example of qualita. tive miscue analysis. Miscues are analyzed to determine whether they represent a change in meaning from the original text. For example, the substitution of hold for fight in 'fight back tht tt4n" is semantically correct and does not alter meaning. However, the substitution of ready for ,-ight in "ht'// bt all right" does change the sense of the passage.

The miscues that produce changes io mean. ing can be further analyzed. Burke 0973) su

8 •

gests that the student's miscue and the original text should be compared in three ways:

1. Graphic Similarity: How much do the two

words look alike? 2. Sound Similarity: How much do the two

words Jotmd alike? 3. Grammatical Function: Is the grammatical

function of the reader's word the same as the grammatical function of the text word? (p. 23)

These questions are drawn from the short form of the Reading Miscue Inventory (Goodman & Burke 1972). The most acceptable miscue is semanti~ cally correct. Less acceptable are errors that are grammatically correct but semantically incorrect and errors that fit the graphic or phonic character. istics of the text but are semantically and gram. macically incorrect.

Error analysis techniques can be used to study comprehension as well as decoding skills. One way to do this is to ask students comprehension questions after they have finished reading a pas. sage. Or students can be ~ked to re~ell the story they have read or summanze the maJor points of an expository passage. In selecting reading mate rials for the assessment of comprehension, the

type of material is an important consideration. Expository, narrative, and ocher types of texts such as poetry and plays are organized differently,

and the reader's experience with rhe type of text may affect comprehension. According to Lapp and Flood (1992), comprehension is influenced by previous contextual knowledge.

Several kinds of questions can be used to assess students' understanding of the meaning of a pas. sage. To evaluate literal comprehension, the student

can be asked to stare the main idea of the passage,

propose a ride for rhe selection, recall details from

the passage, remember a series of events or ideas,

~~/~~

~ --------------------:-:: ,,,,,,--- CHAPTER 13: READING 373

1 • 0

the meaning of vocabulary words

11d eicP adt in the reading selection. Inferential II duce b k' i11cr0 . is assessed Y as ~ng ques~ions that force c11i11k111g go beyond the information provided in

d cs co be k sell ell e· students can as ed to draw conclu- -~g ' d' . al 'cl the i- ake pre icc1on~, ev uate i eas or actions,

sio11s, rn _ 1 cernacive endings for a narrative, and so gest iu • h . . sll8

1 preparing compre ension questions to

forth• 11 y a reading selection, professionals should 111=co!llPC:c che questions are text-dependent. Ques eosllfeh tld be answerable only by students who , S S Ol

[lOfl read che cext. . 1iave lysis of comprehension errors is con-

;.oa al · f cl d • n the same way as an ysis o ecoding ducce ~ sample of the student's responses is errors, d and errors are noted and classified.

a.ch ere ' 1 . fi . g ypically, the c aSSl 1cat1on system is based ?,{ost c f h . che various types o com pre ension questions: 011 . 'dea fact, sequence, vocabulary, inference rna1n i • '

lusion and so forth . The number of errors in cone ' · 1 d h 1 h · h category 1s tota e to e p t e professional ~:c tify the comprehension skills in which the i e~ent requires additional instruction. The stu d C . R d' book Locating an orrectmg ea mg Difficul- ties-Tenth Edition (Cockrum & Shanker, 2013)

rovides suggestions for analyzing errors not ~nly in comprehension skills but also in the areas of emergent literacy, decoding, and study

skills.

ENHANCEDetext Video Example t 3. 3 Watch !his. video to see a teacher applying research-based strd.tef!ies m assessing organizational skills. Organizing main ideas and outlining are discussed.

The Cloze Procedure

The doze procedure (Bormuth, 1968; Jongs~a, 1971) is an informal technique for deterrnin~ng whether a particular textbook or other read1ng material is within a student's instructional read ing level. To use the doze procedure, the teacher selects a passage of approximately 250 words. The first and last sentences of the passage are left intact. In the rest of the passage, every fifth word is deleted and replaced with a blank. For exam ple, the sentence "The little dog sat down beside the boy" would become "The little dog sat ----beside the boy." The student reads the passage and attempts to fill in each of the blanks. If the student correctly supplies between 44 and 57 percent of the missing words, the passage is considered to be at the student's instruc tional level (Bormuth, 1968; Burron & Clay baugh, 1977).

This technique is also useful for assessing comprehension skills. By omitting every fifth (or seventh or nth word), the teacher forces the stu dent to rely on the context clues within the pas sage to derive meaning. Figure 13-3 provides an example.

Two variations of the doze procedure are the maze and the limited doze (Baumann, 1988). The maze is essentially the same as the standard doze except that students are presented with choices for each omitted word; this changes the task from completion to multiple choice. In the limited doze, the student may refer to a list of the omit ted words arranged in random order. Baumann warns that evaluators should be aware that there is an inadequate literature base connecting doze procedures to comprehension.

Diagnostic Teaching and Clinical Reading Interviews

In reading assessment, diagnostic teaching proce dures are often based on the results of a clinical reading interview. Clinical reading interviews combine the techniques of observation, interview ing, and diagnostic probes. The professional observes the student who is engaged in some type of reading task, but assessment does not stop with observation. Students are questioned about their reading strategies, comprehension of the material,

3 7 4 PART JV: A.$.SESSME.'1T Of ACADEMJC SKILLS

I, • ••. •

11 . - • , i . •- I tl l

t .l . 1 • .- •· • 11-,. t.

I ,, · · I . . ..

I '•• I 1.a• •.,: •: ••, t•,1

1 • t • •• 1 f • ''°' '• t\ I•

(,•' • • '• i , ., • •• •

I·• ·•- I ,1

I •· I , · • I, _.

I I , ! I\, I••• ' 1 ,~

I , t ._ • •• • · , ••

I - \ • ·.- ,~, I•

FJGURE 13-3 The Ooze Procedure as a .Measure of Comprehension Skills Source: Cockrum, Ward; Shanker, James L, Locating and Correcting Reading Difficulties, 1 OTh Ed., Cl 2013. Reprinted with Bectronically Reproduces by Permission of Pearson Education, Inc., New York, NY.

and background knowledge abouc passase con tent. In addition, the teacher can afrer the nature of the reading cask to determine how instructional adaptations will affect the student's reading per formance. Clinical reading interviews are dynamic procedures. The professional observes, questions, changes the reading cask, aod then observes and questions again. The goal of the process is to pro: vide information about promising strategies for reading inscruccion.

Clinical interviews focus on the interaction between the reader and the text; they allow the professional to go beyond the product of tbe read ing ace to evaluate the process. There are many important factors to consider when exploring the reading process, including the student's background knowledge, familiarity with che scrucrure of the rext (e.g., narrative or expository),

understanding of anaphoric terms, facility with language, and use of metacognitive strategies (Samuels, 1983).

For example, students may or may not have background knowledge about the content and structure of the passage. These factors are critical for comprehension; if the student is totally unfamil iar with the content being presented, comprehen sion will suffer despite adequate decoding skills.

Anaphoric terms are words that are used as substitutes for words or phrases that have already appeared in a text. In the text "The dog and cat ate their supper. They liked it." there are three .anaphoric terms: their and they, referring to the dog and cat, and it, referring to the supper. Sru dents who are unable to identify the referents of anaphoric terms will lose the meaning of the passage.

'-",:'I~ ~ ···· '~- ..

., acognicive strategies are the methods that !"_.et h. k b h · · 1se co t in a out c e1r interactions with

readers L Effective readers chink about both the ce,cr. . l d h che of rhe materia an t e reading process

cent l (1983) · ,on d. n" co Sam ue s , the active reader •ccor , o . r- h questions as: osks sue

• Why am I reading t~is? Do I want to read chis for superficial overview

• ·1, or for deca1 . Do I know when there is a breakdown in

• h . ' cornpre ens1on. • When there is a breakdown in understand

ing, what can I do co get back on the track again?

• What are the major and minor points of this text?

• Can I summarize or synthesize the major paints made in chis text? (pp. 6-7)

The profession~! ca~ adapt these questions and e chem co mvesttgate the way the student

:ceracts with text during a clinical reading

interview. In addition to asking questions, the profes-

ional can introduce diagnostic probes. For exam ;le, if decoding skills are a concern, the teacher can change the task by reading aloud with the smdent, pronouncing the difficult words for the student, or providing clues for the difficult words. Sometimes the teacher may wish to have che student read the entire passage alone, with out assistance, and then intervene. If the teacher discovers that the student has difficulty with a particular set of decoding skills such as medial vowel sounds or word endings, those skills can be taught, and then the student can attempt the passage again, with the teacher providing help as needed. Having the student do repeated readings of a passage is an excellent technique for evaluating his or her ability co learn and apply new skills.

What is learned about the student's skill lev els and responsiveness to various types of instruc tion during the clinical reading interview is then used to design a diagnostic teaching sequence. Diagnostic teaching is a more structured process. Data are colJected to describe the student's entry level skills; then an instructional intervention is begun and consistently continued over several days. The student's performance is monitored

CHAPTER 13: READING 3 7 5

daily to determine whether the intervention is effective and should be included as part of the instructional program.

Criterion-Referenced Tests

Criterion-referenced tests assess the student's mastery of specific skills within the reading cur riculum. They are based on instructional objec tives and, as Chapter 6 described, are quite easy to constmct. For example, if mastery of high frequency reading words is a goal of the instruc tional program, the teacher could use the word list presented in Table 13-2 as the basis of a criterion-referenced test. The objective for this test might be: The student will read the high frequency list aloud and pronounce at least 200 of the 220 words corredly. The teacher would present each of the words to the student, keep track of errors, and then evaluate the student's perfor mance to determine whether the objective had been achieved.

Several criterion-referenced tests of reading are commercially available, and professionals may select from these rather than constructing meas ures themselves. It is less time consuming to use a criterion-referenced test that has already been pre pared, but the time saved is wasted unless the measure adequately reflects the classroom cturic ulum. In evaluating criterion-referenced tests, professionals should carefully study the objectives on which these measures are based to ensure that che skills included are important ones. Results of criterion-referenced tests should be relevant to the student's curriculum and immediately applicable to instruction.

The series of criterion-referenced tests by Brigance is one of the more popular sets of meas ures. This series includes the BRIGANCE® Inven tory of Early Development-III (2013) for children from birth through age 7, the BRIGANCE® Com prehensive Inventory of Basic Skills-II (CIBS-ll) (2010) for pre-kindergarten through grade 9, and the BRIGANCE® Transition Skills Inventory (2010) for older children and adults with "varying ability levels". Each of these measures contains several tests of reading; even the inventory for preschool children offers tests of readiness and basic reading skills.

376 PART IV ~CSSMC.WOFACADDOCSKlll5

Tht' CIBS- 11 for t'lt'mentary and middle school srudenrs assesses several typt'S of read ing skill s: word recognition, grade placement, oral read ing, reading comprehension, word anaJrsis, and funcrional word recognition. In addirion, some of the teStS on the CIBS-11 have

been normrd, and results can be expressed as srandard scores, percentile ran.ks, and grade equiv alents. In the area of reading, reading/English

Language Am (ELA) skills att assessed. Examples include readiness, word recognition, and word analysis. A technology program, the CIBS-11

StandardiZld Scoring To.of, is available to assist in

thl" scoring process. The Transition Skills measure is intended for

older elementary and secondary grade srudencs. It

contains the same types of tests as those found in the CIBS- 11, but slulls a.re assessed at post•

secondary levels. For example, employment application/forms and job interview skills are

assessed. Other fearurcs of both of these measures

are the tesrs that assess functional skills such as

reading direction words, warning and safety signs,

and informational signs. Many other criterion-referenced tests attempt

to provide comprehensive coverase of the ttading

skill area. For example, the H11dso,, Ed,ution Skills lmitnto,y (Hudson, Colson, Welch, Banikowski,

& Mehring, 1989) provides criterion-referenced

measures of reading readiness, sight vocabulary, phonic analysis, structural analysis, and compre

hension skills for kindergarten through grade 12.

In wing a criterion-referenced inruument such as chis, the proftssional selectS and administers only

those tests that address the skills of interest for the particular student.

C11n-ia1l11RJ-Ba1ed Measurmttnl

In the area of reading, curriculum-based measure

mtot (CBM) techniques are most often used co

evaluate oral reading fluency, that is, the rate at

which students are able to accurately decode

words in oral reading casks. This type of assess

ment is considered curriculum-based because the

reading materials are typially selected from those

raughc as part of the classroom curriculum. An earlier section of this chapter, Reading Fluency

Measures, described this approach as well as oth strategies fur the assessment of skill in r~iner fluency. 8

CBM techniques can also be used ro eval

d . h uate sru ent progress m ot er areas of reading ~m mance. For example, Monitoring Basic Ski//.s p or rrss (MBSP)-S«ond Edition (Fuchs Ham! t rog.

Fuchs, 1997) is a commercially avaiiablc meas' t, &

tha . ad . . __ .J b Urt t 1s m101sce,=. y computer. One of ·r c

. B . R d. , s ,our parts 1s as1c ea mg, a test of comprehe ·

d . . ns1on. The Stu ent 1s presented with a 400-word ead ing passage, with every seventh word om·r ed. Students read silently, and when they com ate ·

. . rd h 1· k e to a missing wo , t ey c 1c on the blank t h "bl o see

t ree poss1 e responses. Students continue d ing until the passage is completed or 2 c r~ •

h . ,.,, min.

utes elapse, w 1chever comes first p .. rsage . · .... s are

avt1lable for grades 1-7, and each is a com let story. P e

As soon as a student has completed a pas.

sage, the program automatically computes d displays the student's current score as well as anhi

h . s

or er progress over time. The score is the own. ber of correct words. In addition, the program

stores student data, so the teacher can access those data later.

The Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Liter-

~ Skills (DIBEIS) is a measure commonly used 10 many schools. Included in this assessment

~e n~essary s~ for learning to read and :; 1mprov10g specific aspects of reading. Educators

~ this tool to monitor student progress multiple

tunes each year or on a daily or weekly basis. Each wk takes one minute ro complete and should not

be_~ as an in-depth assessment. Subresrs include

lmttal Sounds FltJtf/C'J, utter Naming Fluency, Pho fltllll Stgmtnlation Fluency, Nonsense Word F/1/tn('J.

DIBEU Oral Reding Fluency, and Wm/ Us; P/flml'J,

QNestio11naires and Interviews

Questionnaires and interviews are used in read

ing assessment to gather information about stu dents' views and opinions: their attitudes toward

r~i.ng, percep~ions of the reading process, opmio~s. of their own reading abilities, likes and d1sl1kes in reading materials, and 50 on.

~ -

~------------~ CHAPTER. I}: Rf.ADING 377

. ws are preferred for younger students and Jocef":ith paor reading skills; print question choSe reserved for more mature students who ·res are . h h 11111 le to read wit compre ension and answer ,re ll~ •

"°'''nn8• be . . d ill dents can mterv,ewe to find out their Seu eac1· d . d s coward r mg an preferences in read- 11ct1tU \erials- The teacher could ask questions . g ma 111 uch as: 5

_.Jing one of your better subjects in school? • Is re!iLI f ad' ...

portfolios to document progress in read~ng. Possibilities include (1) resulcs of scandard,zed tests and informal assessments (2) student self assessments, (3) samples of the 'types of materials ~ead throughout the year as part of class_~m instruction, and (4) information about parucipa tion in a voluntary leisure reading program (e.g., number of books read each month). Cohen and Weener (2003) contribute these ideas for possible contents of reading portfolios:

What cypes o re mg act1v1t1es are the easiest •

00, Which are the hardest? ~r ~u ~ould read a story about anything in the • y Id what would the story be about? wor ,

,What magazines do you read or look at? • Do you ever read the newspaper? If so, what • arcs of the paper do you read? .

~ould you rather read true stones or stories ' h ak ' h t che aut or m es up. , ~hat are your hobbies? Have you ever read a

book, a stoty, or a magazine anicle about one of our favorite activities?

, ~hat was the last thing you read for fun? When did you read it? What did you enjoy about it?

The purpose of this measure is to elicit infor roation from students about their attitudes toward reading, their study skills and work habits, and their reading interests. In addition, students could be asked to describe the strategies they use when reading and to evaluate their own reading performance.

Portfolio Assessment

Reading is usually one of the areas represented in language arts ponfolios. Separate portfolios for reading are not common. First of all, the act of reading typically does not result in a permanent product. Second, teachers using the whole language approach tend to integrate the language arts so that reading and writing activities overlap. For example, students might keep written logs or journals to record their reactions co the books and stories they read.

Lapp and Flood (1992) suggest several types of information that can be placed in students'

• Measures that reflect and analyze students· decoding and vocabulary skills;

• Measures that reflect and analyze students' comprehension skills;

• Measures that require students to write as a reaction to reading across content areas with different forms of text and for different purposes;

• Measures of students' reading interests and attitudes;

• Lists and logs of students' acrual reading experiences;

• Projects or products that are the outcomes of reading assignments;

• Teachers' progress notes, conference notes, or observational notes about the student when the student is engaged in reading activities; and

• Appraisal of the students' reading skills outside the school environment. (p. 72)

. A. Breakpoint Practice 1 3 .4 V Click here to check your understanding of individual

reading testing.

WITHIN THE CONTEXT Of THE CLASSROOM The assessment procedures described so far have been student-centered measures designed to eval uate the student's current levels of performance in important reading skills. In this section, the emphasis shifts to assessment cools and tech niques for studying the classroom-learning envi ronment and its influence on the student's reading abilities.

- - - 3 7 8 PAA T JV; AS.'>ESSMENT OF ACADEMIC SKJU5

T he l wtmrt1011d/ l!.11viro11111e111

In che elementary grades, assessment of the ins1ructional environment must cake into account the reading curriculum and the instruc tional methods and materials used co impleme-nt chat curriculum. The most common elementary reading program centers on either a basal re&d ing series, children's literature, or a combina tion of the cwo. Some of the newer basals reflect chis approach by including selections from ch.il dren's literature. A basal series is a set of graded reading textbooks chat span a number of grade levels, usually from the beginning reading le-v els (preprimer and primer) through the end of grade 6 or grade 8 . .Assessment of the instruc tional facrors chat fofluence younger students begins with a srudy of the classroom reading program:

l . What is che major component of the class room reading program? .A basal reading cexrbook? Children's .literature? .Another

approach? 2. Does the classroom reading program stress

text, meaning, or the interaction berween

cexr and meaning? 3. Do the reading .materials build on the sru

denrs' language and background experiences,

or do they preseo t unfamiliar con cent? 4. Is there a range of books or ocher reading

materials to accommodate the range of stu dent skills? Or if a third-grade classroom is under srudy, are only grade 3 reading books available?

5. What types of materials are used co supple ment instruction? Workbooks? Worksheets? Computer-based instructional programs? Reading games? Leisure reading books?

6. What types of reading skills are stressed in classroom instruction? Decoding? Flu ency? Comprehension? Oral reading? Silent reading?

7. Are decoding skills taughr? If so, which are emphasized? Sight vocabulary? Phonic analy sis? Suucrural analysis? Conrexrual analysis? A combination?

8. Is the reading cuaiculum organized so chat the sequence of instruction is logical and rhe instructional seeps are of appropriate size?

9. ls reading instruction based on ongoing assessment? How often are performance data collected for monitoring students' progress? What strategies are used to determine the starting points for scudents entering the program?

10. How are students grouped for .reading instruction? Does the entire class receive instruction at one time? Is the class divided into large groups of 10 to 15 students each? Smaller groups of 5 to 8 students? How much individualization takes place in each group?

11. What instructional techniques does the teacher use to present new skills and informa. tion? Lecture? Discussion? Demonstration and modeling?

12. In what types of le-arning activities do sru. dents participate? Oral reading? Silenc read. ing? Completing worksheets? Writing book reports?

13. How is supervised practice incorporated into the reading program? On the average, how many minutes per day do students spend practicing their reading skills?

14. What changes, if any, have been made in the standard reading program ro accommodate the needs of special learners such as the sru. dent under assessment?

The nature of the materials that students are required to read is an imponant factor both for beginning readers and for secondary stu dents who are expected to use reading as a tool for learning in other subject areas. Among the critical characteristics of reading materials are the topic of the texr, the style in which the text is written, format, and readability (Samuels, 1983).

The topic of rhe texr has a direct effect on the reader's ability to read with comprehension; more familiar topics are more easily understood. The clarity of the author's writing style also affects text comprehensibility. Passages that contain too many anaphoric terms, those with poor transi tions from event to event or idea to idea, and those containing long sentences with too much information are difficult to comprehend. In addition, if there is a mismatch between the

information presented in the text and the back ground knowledge of the reader, the author may fail to communicate wich the intended audience. format also plays a role jo texc comprehensibility. Reading materials should be printed clearly, and the text should be organized to facilitate reading and review. In evaluating the format of textbooks, professionals. shout~ check co see if chapters are structured with design features such as headings, subheadings, abstracts, summaries, and review questions.

The readability of a passage is influenced by its content, vocabulary, and organization, and by the structure of its sentences. However, most of che readability formulas available for measur ing reading levels cake only one or perhaps two of these factors into account. For example, Fry's (1968) readability graph, presented in Figure 13-4, uses sentence length and the num ber of syllables per word to estimate readabi1icy. The professional selects three 100-word passages from a book or article, counts the number of sen tences and syllables in each passage, and then uses the graph to determine readability; reada bility estimates are stated in terms of grade level.

Readability formulas and graphs can help the professional evaluate reading materials and match the difficulty levels of materials to stu dents' skill levels. This is particularly important with content area textbooks. Science, social studies, and other content subject texts are graded, but their grade levels refer to the diffi culty of the subject matter, not to reading diffi culty. Thus, a grade 9 science book is likely co contain grade 9 science material, but it may or may not be written at a grade 9 reading level. Readability graphs and formulas can also be used to determine the approximate reading lev els of other types of materials, such as library books, short stories, passages in reference books,

and magazine or newspaper articles. The Fry (1968) graph is a relatively quick and easy

method for estimating readability. It can be used for materials that range from grade 1 co

college level; extensions are available for prep

rimer and primer materials (Maginnis, 1969) and for materials at college and graduate school

levels (Fry, 1977).

OiAPTER 13: READING 3 79

The Interpersonal Environment

The major factors that relate to reading within the interpersonal environment of the classroom are the interactions between students and teachers and the social relationships among students. The most effective way of assessing thes:e interpersonal dimensions is through observation. Classroom observations that are scheduled when sr-udents a.re engaged in reading activities can provide answers co the following questions: ·

• Whac occu.rs when a student makes an error in oral reading? Does the teacher correct the stu dent? Ignore the error? Ask another student co assist?

• How does the student react co the reacher's corrections?

• What do other students do when a peer makes oral reading errors? Do they laugh, cease, or ridicule the student?

• Are poor readers accepted by others in the classroom? Do they participate with their peers in social and free-rime activities?

• What happens when a student reads correctly? Does the teacher confirm the correct responses? Praise the student? Provide a tangible reward or token?

• Are students able to work independently on silent reading assignments and on workbook and other writing activities? Or do certain sru dents require frequent assistance from the teacher?

Another factor co take into account when evaluating student-teacher interactions is the amount of time teachers spend teaching reading and students spend practicing reading skills. Early studies of programs for students with mild disabilities found that students were actively engaged in reading for only a few minutes each day (Leinhardc, Zigmond, & Cooley, 1981; Thurlow, Graden, Greener, & Ysseldyke, 1983; Zigmond, Vallecorsa, & Leinhardt, 1980). Engagement time muse be a concern in assess

ment because the amount of time that students and teachers spend in instructional interactions

is likely to have a direct effect on the amount of

progress chat students make in their attempts to

develop reading skills.

' :-:-----------~ '-, 380 PMTIV: As.sES.SMill.TOFACADOUCSKILLS ~

FIGURE 1,-4

25.0 .,, "E 16.7 0 3: 12.5 0 e 10.0

8. 8.3 .,, 7.1 8

C Q) 6.3 c c,J 5.6 0 5.0 Qi ~ 4.5 E :,

4.2 z CD 0) 3.8 IIJ Qi

3.6 > <

3.3

2.5

108 116 124 132 140 148 156 164 172 180 Average Number ol Syllables per 100 Words

Directions: Randomly select 3 one hundred word passages lrom a book or an article. Plot mber of Syllables and average number of sentences per 100 words average nu . Choo

on graph 10 determine the grade level of the matenal. se more passages per book ii great variability is observed, and conclude that the book has uneven readability. Few books wil fa1 in gray area but when they do, grade level scores are invaid.

Example: 1st hundred wolds

2nd hundred words 3rd hundred words

Average

Syllables 124 141 158 141

Sentences 6.6 5.5 6.8

6.3

Readability 7th grade (see dot plotted on graph)

Fry Readability Graph

Sorn::e: Fram A Readability Formula That Saw,s Tm, by E. Ffy, McGraw-Htl Education.

The PhJsiCIJ/ Environ111t11t

The physical environment of the classroom an also affea students' reading pem>rmance, Envi ronmental &ctors such as lighting, tempeacwe, and ventilation influma the students' and the

reacher's comfon levels and can either facilitate or hinder the teaching-learning process. In addition, the physical arrangement of the classroom is. an important consideration, particularly in relatwn m searing configurations and allocation of class room space.

. -~ · ·-:a-· . ,,\ ~ -.. ~"·

, ~ --------------------O-I_A_P'f_E_•R-l-3:-::R:-::E:-:-A:::D::IN:G~3Sl

. f sessment cools f che questions that can be asked

Some O

1 ssroom's physical environment the great number nnd diversity ,0 L\S thilC the for reading, it is particulnrly imporro:i Assess assessment process be rorefully plllnn · -s thot t,e c a d' . .

a.nl.lc c . ,.,pact on rea mg mstmcuon ace as 'd jcS I••·

,11 s· r0Uo"' · ting arrangements ace used for 1' sea . d \'flta.c . . scruct1on? Are srn encs seated so 1· rending in can easily see and hear the

i..e,c cheY [II )

cenctier: hcing in the classroom adequate foe Js che hg

2, d'ng? d h c ren 1 · m space structure so t at areas 10c 1 Is c1assrOO •vicies are separated from the areas i · . ·er iicc1 k d' , 1101s1 . activities li e cea mg.

for quiecerscudencs' seats arranged foe inde J-{o\V are ork? Are students' desks or tables

4. d nc w · pen_ ~ d so chat students do not distract p0sinone

e another? k " ffi " on chere any quiet wor areas or o ices

5. f.re . he classroom where students can go ·chin c . .

wi from d1scract1ons? co escapea variety of reading materials in the

6 Is there , D h . 1 · m for student use. o t e materm s c1assroo f . . 1 1 wide range o topics, mterest eve s, cover a h 'al .

d reading levels? Are t e maten s access,- an ? ble to students.

1 omputer available in the classroom for

7· s ~;nts co practice reading skills? Do sm- SCll ' f d . all d cs have access to a variety o e ucatton y en . ad' , und software programs m re mg.

;hat types of reading materials are available S. in the school library or media center? Are

these materials accessible to students?

ANSWERING THE ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS The major purpose of reading assessment is to describe students' current levels of educational per formance. There are many assessment tools designed for chis purpose. They represent numerous types of techniques: diagnostic reading tests, fluency meas ures, informal reading inventories, error and mis cue analysis procedures, clinical reading interviews, diagnostic teaching, doze and maze procedures, criterion-referenced tests, curriculum-based meas ures, teacher checklists, interviews, observation, ponfolios, and other informal strategies. Because of

. . l sive meOSlh~ ment begins with compre 1en otentiol sample several rending skills. When p nssesseJ problem areos are identified, these nCCO.S lU'C

5 and

. h . c ,al meosure further, usually wit 1n1orn techniques.

Naflm of the Asse.ssmwt Tools · the ronge of

Tools for reading assessment vary 10 • mens- reading skills they assess. Com~rehen~;ve Te.sts uces such as the Woodcoc·k Readmg Nit. ,l!f'Y k' lls

'd f rending s 1 ' attempt co ~valuate 11 w1 e range O

1 0 Re,idi"g

wheceos an instmment such ns the Tes { h d. . c ses on n nM-

Comprehension-Fourt E 1110n ,ocu .1 . t mensures touay

rower set of skills. However, mos d \' g . d h ss both · eco<. in ace comprehensive an t ey o.sse l

. • . -r bl 13-l illustru.te<. and comprehension skills . .1a e 'b \ this point. Of the rending measures desert ec '

d d. r compre- only a handful assess either eco ing 0

hension, but not both. \ f · \ pn o Assessment tools can also vary 10 <. e

skill coverage. Standardized tests typicnlly Sl\m• · \ nly o. pie several skills and levels but prov1c e o

few representative test items in ench nren. For example, a subtest on phonic nnalysis may devote only two or three test items to the skill of <lccod ing consonant-vowel-consonant words. lnformnl measures, particularly criterion-referenced tests, allow study of specific skills in much greater

depth. Measures of reading may also differ by the

types of reading tasks chat srn<lents nrc required co perform. Table 13- 3 describes s~v eral of the more common measures of c.leco<ltng and comprehension and the ways these meas ures go about assessment. Measures differ on the number of words on each list, the actual words included, and whether time limiu nre imposed.

In the area of comprehension, nsse11ment tasks are much more varied. The GORT- , anJ the Analytical Reading 1"ventury- Tmth I!.ditiur, use the standard tasks of reading gradell pas sages an<l answering comprehension c.1ueuiuns based on the content of the passages. 1 lowc-ver, questions are open-ended on the AUi but

382 PAkT IV AS.',r,ssr.ff;NT OF ACADDdJC Sl([U.5

TlillLE l 'H lincmnrm Tasks Used ro Evaluate Reading Skills - RV.ntf\G

PRESENTATION

SI.IU. !IIEJ\Sl'/iE SUBTEST MODE RESPONSE MODE - Dt-coding GrtrJ Oral Rt4ding (cntitt rm) Look at a series of Read each passage

T u11-F ijth Edition graded passages. aloud as quickly and accurately as possible.

Anal)tiral Rtading Word Lim Look ac lists of isolated Read each word aloud. lnmitory-Tmth &Ji1io11 words.

\l'loo.iro<k Rtading /if41ttr Word Amck Look at lists of nonsense Read each word or Tm,-Third Edi1io11 words and syllables. syllable aloud.

Woodrork R((lding !t11111tr Word Look at liscs of isolated Read each word aloud Tu11-Third Edition Idcnrifiarion words. within 5 seconds.

Comprthension Grll) Oral Rt11ding (enritt test) Look at a series of Read the passages Tu11-Fif1h EJition graded passages; listen orally; answer the com-

to multiple-choice prehension questions by ccmprchcnsion questions saying the letter of the read aloud by the tester. correct answer.

A1111lytical Rt11Jing Gradtd Look at a series of Make predictions I ntfmory-Ttnth Passages graded passages; listen about each passage; Edition to qutStions read aloud read each passage

by the tester. oral! y; retell each pas- sage and, if necessary, answer comprehension questions.

Text Look at short passage, Silently read each Ttlt of Rfllding Comprthnuiot1- Compttbensioo then read multiple- paragraph and the Fo11rth EJitio• choice comprehension comprehension ques-

questions. tions that accompany it; mark answers on the separate answer sheet

Wooaad Reding M4Itery Passage Look ar a passage with Read the passage Tests-Third E.Jitio• C.Omprehcnsioo one word missing. silently and say the

multiple choice on the GORT-5. The cask on the TORC-4 is somewhat different; students read scandard types of passages and then read the multiple-choice comprehension questions themselves rather than listening ro the tester

' :n( read them. The WRMT -3 uses a doze proce- dure co assess comprehension; no questions are asked. The srudent reads passages silently and then attempts co supply che words missing in each passage.

missing word.

Oral reading is required on the comprehen sion rasks on the G0RT-5 and the ARI· the nf I

WRMT -3 and the TORC-4 employ silent reading tasks. Students respond orally on each measure except the TORC-4. The TORC-4 and the ~ORT-5 use m~le-choice comprehension questions; the WRMT -3 a completion task; and the ARI, open-ended questions.

Oearly, measures of reading differ impor tantly in the ways they assess decoding and

·. .~ I•••

----------------------~383 _,,,.,,--- CHAYTEll 13: ll£ADING

S ion skills. These differences must be

ehen . h ,olflfr ered in sel~ctmg t _e tools for reading , 011s1d and in rnterpretmg the results of the

essment 11,SS ment, pSess

e/ationship of Reading to Other '{he R J performance ;.reas 01 .

the assessment team begrns to evaluate \'(hen ret its results, one of the major tasks

d interp 1 . b' an dy of the re auons 1ps among areas of is ther~t~ce. Academic skills such as reading perf0 • fluence or be influenced by several other rnaY in

areas• dent's general aptitude for learning can A scu . effect on the ease and speed with which

have. an skills are acquired. In general, students reading I · 11· ·ch lower than average genera mte 1gence are ""' d to progress at a somewhat slower rate expecteudents of average intellectual ability. Sev- chan st b cl . cal ccempts have een ma e to quanufy the e

1 .a nship between IQ and reading, and reading

re ac10 Caney formulas have resulted (Bond &

expec . . k b r. ker 1967; Hams, 1970, My le use, 1968).

in , h d • . These formulas use t e stu enc s current mtellec-

al performance and sometimes other factors, tU . h 1 d' such as age or years 10 sc oo , to pre 1cc an expected reading level.

Expectancy formulas have several limita tions; most notably their reliance on age and grade scores, and their use is not recommended. Instead, standard scores are preferred for compar ing and contrasting IQ test results and results from measures of reading. Measures such as the WRMT™-3, the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test-III, and the Woodcock-johmon IV provide pro cedures for the analysis of aptitude-achievement discrepancies.

Like general learning aptitude, specific learning abilities and strategies can influence the student's success in the acquisition and applica tion of reading skills. Problems in attention, memory, or other areas such as phonological awareness can hinder skill development, particu larly the acquisition of basic decoding skills. Inefficient learning strategies can interfere when students attempt to read with comprehension. In the secondary grades, poor learning strategies

• • __ -1 · lcills co prevent may combine with poor rc:-4.Urng s d ' as a students from successfully using rea ing

study technique. . Classroom behavior may be related co reading

performance. Inappropriate classroo~ cood ~ can impede classroom learning, including acq . . d 1· . f eac1· skills Poor smon an app 1cat1on o r mg · .

· _ er d ' behavior. achievement can also anect a stu ent s f. Difficulty in reading can result in lowered sel - concept and negative attitudes coward sch~l and learning. Achievement problems can even influ ence peer relationships and the srudent's conduct in social and instructional siruations.

Reading pervades the school curriculum. It has a direct impact oo several other areas of s<:11001

performance, particularly language artS subJ~· Writing skills such as spelling and composm~n are directly affected by delayed develop':11-ent ~n reading. In written language, the expressive skill of writing is built on the receptive skill o~ r~ ing. Similarly, the development of begmrung reading skills is influenced by the student's oral language proficiency. • . .

Reading can also affect the students ability to perform successfully in mathematics and other subjects. Although arithmetic computation usu ally does not require reading skills, other mathe matics tasks do. Students are often asked to read explanations in mathematics textbooks, to read the directions for mathematics worksheets or workbook pages, and to read word problems.

Reading is almost a necessity for content area subjects such as science, history, English, and social studies. Even in the elementary grades, stu dents may be expected to use reading to acquire content area information. At the secondary level, reading assignments are routine. Students are expected to learn by reading textbooks and other materials. Students can bypass their poor reading skills by using aids such as taped versions of text books, but students with disabilities who are included in general education classrooms will still be expected to achieve at least a minimal level of reading proficiency.

In addition, there are very real reading demands in the adult world. Reading is a neces sity for most occupations, and the average adult is constantly faced with text to read: street and

384 PART N : ASSF.SSMENTOF ACAOEMICSKil..LS

rrnffic signs, signs on buildings and restroom doors, commercial ads, want ads, newspapers, magazines, television schedules, job application forms, postcards and lette~, grocery labels, labels on cosmetics and mf'dications, menus, and the like. The abiliry to read and comprehend every day reading materials such as these is an impor tant concern for all students, partiruJarly older scudencs with special instructional needs.

Doc11111e1/Jalio11 of Re11di11g Pe,fo111u111ce

The general question that guides the assessment

ream in its study of reading skills is, Whllt 11rt tht 1111denr's tdi1C11tiofllll 'fllt4i? The purpose of this phase of assessment is to describe precisely the srudenr's current skill levels; these data then

serve as the basis for planning the student's edu

cational program. The first question that the team attempts to answer is, Whllt is tht 1111dtn1'1

current lt11el of rt11ding «hitvtmtnt? Then addi tional information is gathered about areas in

which the student appears to be experiencing difficuJcy. The result is a description of the stu dent's current performance in readjng chat is spe cific enough to answer the question, Whllt are tht

s111dtnl's Jtrtngths and weaknesses in the various skill aruJ of rrtlding?

Data are gathered from many sources using many types of assessment tools. The team usually begins by reviewing school records, resulcs of individual achievement tescs, interviews with pareocs and teachers, and classroom observations to plan the reading assessment. Next, a diagnostic reading test may be administered to survey the student's skills in several ueas of rtading. Test results are used to jdencify potential problem areas, and these skills and subskills are further

assessed with informal measures and techniques. There are many alternatives for reading

assessmenr-resrs, inventories, error analysis pro cedures, and clinical leading interviews, among

others-and the assessment team must choose ics

tools c.arefully co avoid duplication and ensure

that assessment is as efficient as possible. As a

genea.J rule, the more specific measures and tech niques such as criterion-referenced tests and clini.

cal reading interviews are reserved for in-depth analysis of poreoriaJ weaknesses.

ENHANCEDetext Video Example 13 .4 Watrh this video to see a teacher working with a student on an individual reading assessment task in the context of

probes and aim line (Curriculum Based MeasuremenQ.

:\.1.1('.'i.1111c11/ i11 / \clio11

1, k r

Tyler's problem In reading Is one of the reasons Mr. Adams, his fourth-grade teacher, referred him for special education assessment. Tyler Is unable to read any of the fourth-grade texts In his classroom, and he is now working in a beginnin third-grade reading book. Results of individual 9

achievement tests such as the PIAT-111 confirmed that Tyler's reading performance Is below that expected for his age and grade. Tyler considers reading one of his least favorites school subjects· he states that he is •dumb" In reading. '

The assessment team believes that instruction In reading will be an important part of Tyler's individual education program. Evaluatlon of Tyler's current reading skills will begin with administration of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests-3, a norm-referenced measure that evaluates several components of the reading process, Including sight word vocabulary, word attack skills, and passage comprehension. In addition, an informal reading Inventory will be administered to gather Information about T0er's oral reading skills and his ability to derive meaning from the material he reads. Mr, Adams, Tyler's classroom teacher will assist by gathering samples of T~er's o~ reading to assess reading fluency skills.

Informal assessment strategies will ih9~ed to further explore the particular

bB seiec klllS that appear to be areas of weak readin9/ryier. For example, if sight word nesS to seems to be a need, the team vocabU:Jse a criterion-referenced test to could d Tyler's mastery of standard lists of sight asSessf r first-, second-, and third-grade stu words ~ If comprehension skills are a con dents. er team could analyze the types of cern, t; ler makes In his attempts to answer errors ~ension questions. cornP~

0 results obtained from these assess

i ~Ill be used to develop part of the lndi rnent~ ed special education program for Tyler. vidu; fer Is unable to read any ~f the grade 4

Y ks in his classroom. He 1s now working textbbo~inning third-grade, reading book with In a /success. Previous assessment with the som RJNU and Interviews with Mr. Adams, pJAT;s teacher, confirm that Tyler's current ~i:~lng performance is below that expected for

1 age and grade.

h s The assessment team begins its study of r ler's reading skllls by administering the Woodick Reading Mastery Tests-3. Tyler earns these scores:

subtest

word Identification

Word Attack word Comprehension Passage Comprehension

Cluster

Basic Skills Reading Comprehension · Total Reading

Standard Score Range

72-75 79-86

83-90

79-85

74-77 81-82

77-80

T~er's overall perfom,ance on the WRMT™-3 falls within the low-average range. His compreha,slon skills appear stronger than his decoding skills. Tyler shows low-average performance on the Word Identification subtest, a measure of sight vocabulary, and low-average to average performance on the Word Attack subtest, a measure of skill In phonic analysis of unknown words.

Next, the Analytical Reading Inventory Is administered to gain more information about Tyler's oral reading abilities. According to this Inventory, Tyler's Independent Reading Level is

CHAPTE.R 13: READING 385

grade 1, his Instructional Level ls grade 2, and his Frustration Level is grade 3. On the reading Passages, Tyler makes very few comprehension errors until he reaches frustration level.

Tyler's oral reading responses on the WRMT™-3 and the AR/ are analyzed to identify patterns of errors. Tyler can recognize only a few words by sight. When he does not . recognize a word, he attempts to decode it by sounding It out and by using available context clues. However, Tyler shows weak phonic analysis skll\s, and the majority of his decoding errors are substitutions that Involve mispronunciation of vowel sounds. In reading connected text, Tyler appears to look at the initial consonant of the word and then guess from context. Most of his substitutions make sense in context and begin with the correct initial consonant sound.

A series of criterion-referenced tests are used for further analysts of Tyler's decoding skllls. On the BR/GANG~ Comprehensive Inventory of Basic SkillsRevised, Tyler shows strengths In knowledge of consonant sounds, short-vowel sounds, and consonant blends. However, results Indicate that Tyler has not yet mastered long-vowel sounds, consonant digraphs, and diphthongs. The updated version of the Dolch high-frequency word list (Table 13-2) is used to assess Tyler's sight word vocabulary. Of the 220 words, Tyler Is able to recognize 97; most of his errors occur In the second- and third-grade lists.

After careful analysis of these results, the assessment team is ready to describe Tyler's current levels of reading performance. Their conclusions are as follows:

• Tyler's current Instructional reading level ls grade 2, as measured by the Analytical Reading Inventory. At this level, Tyler com prehends well but requires assistance in decoding.

• In general, Tyler's comprehension skills are more advanced than his decoding skllls. He uses context to help him decode unknown words.

• Tyler can recognize most preprimer and primer sight words. He has not yet mastered grades 1 , 2, and 3 sight words.

• Tyler knows the sounds of consonants and con sonant blends and the short sounds of vowels. He has not yet mastered long-vowel sounds, consonant digraphs, and diphthongs.

386 PARTfV: ASS~NTOFACADEMICSKJllS

SUMMARY

• Srudencs' readins skills arc messed for several r-ea sons. In determinins eligibility for s~ial edu cadoo programs, overall school performance is iovestigared, and reading is an imporwu compc> nent of school achi~mtot. In addition, general educacioo teachers monitor their srudencs' progress in reading. Reading proficiency is one of the mini mum compcceocies assessed by many schools and districts for grade advancement and high school gnduarioo, and reading is always included on the state-mandated resrs of school achievemeoc that assess srudeots' progress toward sratt performance standards. Io special education, reading skills are assessed not only fOI' dettrmining program eligibil

ity, but also for planning ioscruction.

• Two examples of subrests from che W~ Rtd.i,,g Mmttry Tut1-Third Editio• are the Rapid Automatic Naming Subcest and che Oral Readmg Fluency Sub

tesc. In che Rapid Automatic Naming Subrest, the test taker names 36 jttms as rapidly as possible. The time ta.ken to name items, as well as the number of

errors, are considered in this subrest. In the Oral Reading FlUtDcy Subtest, the test taker reads pas· sage/passages and is timed by enmioer who also ttCOrds errors. Words read correctly in 10 seconds

arc measured in chc score.

• The Gr4J 0,11/ Rt4di11g Tt1t1-Fifth P.diritm (GOIU-5) assess students' ability to read passages aloud

quiclcly and accurately with adequate comprehen

sion. The current version of this rest is the fourth update of a popular mmurc dmlopcd by William S. Gray (1967). According to the manual, the GORT-5 s designed to identify students with prob lems in reading, detwnine srudenrs' sutngchs and wealcncsscs, and document progress in reading.

• Two mmples of sumsts in the TORC-4 att the Sm lllla Comp/tli()II m Par11g,4Ph Conslrlldion subcests. In the Sm1ma CDllplerio" subtest, srudencs silently read single sentences with cwo missing words. From a list ci word pairs, they select the appropriate response co comp)ece the scntencCS. ln the P "'"graph C0Nlrll<lil11, seorenccs that make up a paragraph are listed in ran dom order. The srudeoc's task is to determine the sequence in which the sentences should appear.

------------------.......

I - ~- .J

• Some measures of phonemic awareness and phono,

logical processing, such as the Tut of Phonologi'4/ AuwmtSJ-StaJ11d Edition: PLUS (Torgesen & Bry. ant, 2004) and the Test of Phonological Auw~, Skills (Newcome-r & Ba.ttnbaum, 2003), ate designed for younser ch.ildrcn in the elementary Srades. Others, such as the Con,prrhensivt Test of Phonologi'4/ Pro<eSsing-2 (Wasner et al., 2013), are appropriate for both youns children and older students in tht elementary, middle, and high school grades.

• One a'llmple of a commercially available curriculum. based reading measure is the Rtading Flumcy Pl'llgrui Monitor (lhnot, 2006), a component of the Rtad Nat ura/I)' (Ihnot, 2000, 2001, 2003) instructional pro gram mentioned in Chapter 6. This measure 4 designed to assess students' ability to~ connected m..-t quickly and accurately. Students are asked to read a passage aloud for 1 minute while the teachtr marks errors.

• Most informal ttading inventories are designed for elementary and middle school students. One excep tion is the Infom,a/ Reaaing Inventory-Eighth Edition (Roe & Bums, 2010), which conwns pass-ages &om preprimcr to grade 12 level. Another notewonby

measure is the Engli1h-E1pano/ Reading ln11t111qry for

rht C'4sJroom (Flynt & Cooter, 1999). It- provides narrative and expository passages from preprimer to

grade 9 levels both in English and in Spanjsh.

• Checklists are a quick and efficient means of gather

ing information from teachers and other J>rofession

als about their observations and perceptions of

students' reading skills. The reading behavio!l described on checklists can be of any kind: decocf. ing, comprehension, oral reading, silent reading, or

a combination. Error analysis is a study of the mis takes that students make. Unlike the more 8cncral procedure-response analysis-it does not take into consideration both correct and incorrect responses. In reading assessment, incorrect responses provid, information about how the student is processing the cm and suggest directions for instructional inrerventions.

• In the elementary grades, assessment of the iostnJC• cional environment must take into account dlt

;;

--------------------== CHAPTER B: READING 3 87

d . 0

., curriculum and the instructional method reilo d . I s

d rnacerials use to imp ement that curriculum

i n 'd h . her factor to cons1 er w en evaluating scud

}loot . . enc-

h er interacuons 1s the amount of time teach

ceac ac1· d ers

5 od ceachin~ re mg an students spend practic-

i: reiding skills.

roots for reading assessment vary in the range of • d'ng skills chey assess. Comprehensive measur -1 k p es such as the Woodco, Reaamg Mastery Tt1ts- attempt

~o evaluate a wide range of reading skills, whereas an instrument such as the Tt.1t of Rtading Comprehension- Fourth Edition focuses on a narrower set of skills. Assessment tools can also vary in depth of skill cov erage. Standardized rests cypically sample several skills and levels buc provide only a few representa tive test items in each area. Informal measures, par ticularly criterion-referenced tests, allow study of specific skills in much greater depth.