Are Fluency Measures Accurate Predictors of Reading Achievement?

Stephen G. Schilling · Joanne F. Carlisle

121 citations0/0 files storedThe Elementary School Journal

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Reading and Literacy Development Early Childhood Education and Development Educational Assessment and Improvement

Abstract

This study focused on the predictive validity of fluency measures that comprise Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS). Data were gathered from first through third graders attending 44 schools in 9 districts or local educational agencies that made up the first Reading First cohort in Michigan. Students were administered DIBELS subtests in the fall, winter, and spring, and they took the reading subtests of the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS) in the spring. Results showed that DIBELS subtests significantly predicted year‐end reading achievement on the ITBS, Reading Total subtest. They also showed that DIBELS at‐risk benchmarks for oral reading fluency (ORF) were reasonably accurate at identifying second and third graders who were reading below the twenty‐fifth percentile at the end of the year (80% and 76% for second and third graders, respectively). However, 32% of second graders and 37% of third graders who were identified as at low risk by the ORF benchmarks turned out not to be reading at grade level on ITBS in April. We discuss 2 possibilities for improving the assessment of students’ progress in reading: (a) supplementing DIBELS with measures of reading comprehension and vocabulary, and (b) using frequent progress‐monitoring assessments for students at risk for reading problems to identify students who are not responding to classroom instruction

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 121 citations exist upstream.

References

1974Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading 2001Oral Reading Fluency as an Indicator of Reading Competence: A Theoretical, Empirical, and Historical Analysis 2006Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it?1996Signal Detection Theory and ROC Analysis in Psychology and Diagnostics: Collected Papers 1999Inference making ability and its relation to comprehension failure in young children 2003Sources of Individual Differences in Reading Comprehension and Reading Fluency.2001The Importance and Decision-Making Utility of a Continuum of Fluency-Based Indicators of Foundational Reading Skills for Third-Grade High-Stakes Outcomes 2003Response to Instruction as a Means of Identifying Students with Reading/Learning Disabilities

Cited by

2010Literacy coaching as a component of professional development 2009Revisiting assumptions about the relationship of fluent reading to comprehension: Spanish-speakers’ text-reading fluency in English 2013Is oral/text reading fluency a “bridge” to reading comprehension?2019Relations between CBM (oral reading and maze) and reading comprehension on state achievement tests: A meta-analysis

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.