![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
An essential component of a response to intervention (RTI) framework is a screening process that is both accurate and efficient. The purpose of this study was to analyze the validity evidence for the Test of Silent Reading Efficiency and Comprehension (TOSREC) to determine its potential for use within a screening process. Participants included 226 students in Grades 1 to 5. Validity evidence was analyzed through (a) correlation with performance on concurrent, individually administered oral reading fluency (ORF) measures, (b) correlation with performance on concurrently administered reading comprehension measures, (c) correlation of fall and winter TOSREC performance with a state reading outcome measure administered in spring, (d) a binary classification analysis to predict whether students met grade-level performance benchmarks on a state reading assessment, and (e) a stepwise regression analysis examining the variance in performance on a state assessment accounted for by TOSREC and ORF. The concurrent correlations of TOSREC with ORF were high, with the exception of the fall fourth grade administration. Correlations of TOSREC and outcome measures were consistent with those of ORF. The binary classification analysis examining the TOSREC’s ability to accurately predict those students who did not meet grade-level performance benchmarks on the state’s reading assessment demonstrated high classification accuracy (90%) as well as high sensitivity (78%) and specificity (86%). Finally, a regression analysis indicated that the TOSREC accounted for additional unique variance in state assessment performance above and beyond ORF. Implications for practice are discussed.
References
|
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education . (1999). The standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. Google Scholar | |
|
Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Bryant, J. D. (2006). Selecting at-risk readers in first grade for early intervention: A two-year longitudinal study of decision rules and procedures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 394–409. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Data Recognition Corporation . (2009). Idaho Standards Achievement Tests, Spring 2009 Technical Report. Retrieved from http://www.sde.idaho.gov/site/assessment/ISAT/technicalReports.htm Google Scholar | |
|
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219–232. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Fuchs, L. S. (2004). The past, present and future of curriculum-based measurement research. School Psychology Review, 33, 188–192. Google Scholar | ISI | |
|
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 239–256. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Idaho State Department of Education . (2009). Student Ethnicity Statistics, 2009-2010. Retrieved from http://www.sde.idaho.gov/site/statistics/student_ethnicity.htm Google Scholar | |
|
Jenkins, J. R. (2003, December). Candidate measures for screening at-risk students. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities responsiveness-to-intervention symposium, Kansas City, MO. Google Scholar | |
|
Jenkins, J. R., Hudson, R. F., Johnson, E. S. (2007). Screening for service delivery in an RTI framework: Candidate measures. School Psychology Review, 36, 582–599. Google Scholar | |
|
Johnson, E. S., Jenkins, J. R., Petscher, Y., Catts, H. W. (2009). Screening for early identification and intervention: How accurate are existing tools and procedures in predicting first grade reading outcomes? Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24, 174–194. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Kameenui, E. J. (1993). Diverse learners and the tyranny of time: Don’t fix blame; fix the leaky roof. The Reading Teacher, 46, 376–383. Google Scholar | ISI | |
|
Kuhn, M. R., Schwanenflugel, P. J., Meisinger, E. B. (2010). Review of research: Aligning theory and assessment of reading fluency: Automaticity, prosody and definitions of fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 223–231. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
LaBerge, D., Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
National Center on Response to Intervention . (2010a). Essential components of RTI—A closer look at response to intervention. Washington, DC: Office of Special Education Programs. Google Scholar | |
|
National Center on Response to Intervention . (2010b). Screening tools chart. Washington, DC: Office of Special Education Programs. Retrieved from http://www.rti4success.org Google Scholar | |
|
Northwest Evaluation Association . (2003). Technical manual for the NWEA Measures of Academic Progress and Achievement Level Tests. Portland, OR: Author. Google Scholar | |
|
Pearson, P. D. (2006). Foreword. In Goodman, K. S. (Ed.), The truth about DIBELS: What it is, what it does (pp. v–xix). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Google Scholar | |
|
Pressley, M., Hilden, K., Shankland, R. (2005). An evaluation of end-grade-3 DIBELS: Speed reading without comprehension, predicting little (Tech. rep.). East Lansing: Michigan State University, Literacy Achievement Research Center. Google Scholar | |
|
Samuels, S. J. (2006). Toward a model of reading fluency. In Samuels, S. J., Farstrup, A. E. (Eds.), What research has to say about fluency instruction (pp. 40–63). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Google Scholar | |
|
Samuels, S. J. (2007). The DIBELS tests: Is speed of barking at print what we mean by reading fluency? Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 563–566. Google Scholar | ISI | |
|
Shinn, M. J. (2010, April). Making progress monitoring and screening evidence-based AND practical. Presentation at the Idaho State RTI conference, Boise, ID. Google Scholar | |
|
Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A., Pearson, N. A. (2010). Test of Silent Reading Efficiency and Comprehension (TOSREC) examiner’s manual. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed. Google Scholar | |
|
Wilson, B. J., Reichmuth, M. (1985). Early-screening programs: When is predictive accuracy sufficient? Learning Disability Quarterly, 8, 182–188. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI |
