Below the bar: Profiles of students who fail state reading assessments

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 219-239

  Buly, Marsha Riddle ^a   Valencia, Sheila W ^b  

^a WESTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Accountability; Assessment; Policy; Reading

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036770820     PISSN: 01623737     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/01623737024003219     Document Type: Article

References (105)

1. Abelman, C., & Elmore, R. F. (1999). When accountability knocks, will anyone answer? (CPRE Research Report No. RR-042). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
2. Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. Adams, M. J., Foorman, B. R., Lundberg, I., & Beeler, T. (1998). Phonemic awareness in young children: A classroom curriculum. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
4. Aldenderfer, M., & Blashfield, R. (1984). Cluster analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
5. Allington, R. L. (2000). Effects of reading policy on classroom instruction and student achievement (Report Series 13011). Albany, NY: National Research Center on English Learning and Achievement.
6. Allington, R. L. (2001). What really matters for struggling readers. New York: Longman.
7. Allington, R. L., & McGill-Franzen, A. (1992b). Does high stakes testing improve school effectiveness? Spectrum, 10, 3-12.
8. Allington, R. L., & Walmsley, S. (1995). No quick fix: Rethinking literacy programs in America's elementary schools. New York: Teachers College Press.
9. Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2002). High-stakes testing, uncertainty, and student learning [Electronic version]. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(18). Retrieved September 19, 2002 from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n18/.
10. Anderson, R. C., & Freebody, P. (1981). Vocabulary knowledge. In J. T. Guthrie (Ed.), Comprehension and teaching: Research perspectives (pp. 71-117). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
11. Au, K. H., & Carroll, J. H. (1997). Improving literacy achievement through a constructivist approach: The KEEP Demonstration Classroom Project. Elementary School Journal, 97(3), 203-221
12. Au, K. H., & Valencia, S. W. (1997). The complexities of portfolio assessment. In D. Hansen & N. Burbules (Eds.), Teaching and its predicaments (pp. 123-144). Boulder, CO: Westview.
13. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7-74.
14. Borko, H., Elliott, R., & Uchiyama, K. (1999). Professional development: A key to Kentucky's reform effort (CSE Technical Report 512). CRESST: University of Colorado at Boulder.
15. Brown, R. G. (1991) Schools of thought; How the politics of literacy shape thinking in the classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
16. Bus, A. G., & Van Izendoorn, M. H. (1999). Phonological awareness and early reading: A meta-analysis of experimental training studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 403-414.
17. Callahan, S. (1997). Tests worth taking: Using portfolios for accountability in Kentucky. Research in the Teaching of English, 31, 295-336.
18. Carver, R. P. (1990). Reading rate: A review of research and theory. San Diego, CA: Academic.
19. Chall, J. S. (1967). Learning to read: The great debate. New York: McGraw-Hill.
20. Clay, M. M. (1993a). An observation survey of early literacy achievement, Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
21. Clay, M. M. (1993b). Reading recovery; A guidebook for teachers in training. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
22. Cohen, D. K., & Ball, D. L. (1990). Relations between policy and practice: A commentary. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12, 249-256.
23. Cohen, D. K., & Barnes, C. A. (1993a). Pedagogy and policy. In D. K. Cohen, M. W. McLaughlin, & J. E. Talbert (Eds.), Teaching for understanding: Challenges for policy and practice (pp. 204-239). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
24. Cohen, D. K., & Barnes, C. A. (1993b). Pedagogy and policy. In D. K. Cohen, M. W. McLaughlin, & J. E. Talbert (Eds.) Teaching for understanding: Challenges for policy and practice (pp. 240-276). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
25. Cohen, D. K., & Hill, H. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The mathematics reform in California. Teachers College Record, 102, 294-343.
26. Cohen, D. K., & Spillane, J. (1992). Policy and practice: The relations between governance and instruction. In G. Grant (Ed.), The review of research in education (pp. 3-49). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
27. Collier, V. P. (1987). Age and rate of acquisition of second language for academic purposes. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 617-641.
28. Collier, V. P. (1989). How long? A synthesis of research on academic achievement in a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 509-531.
29. Cummins, J. (1991). The development of bilingual proficiency from home to school: A longitudinal study of Portuguese-speaking children. Journal of Education, 173, 85-98.
30. Davis, F. B. (1968). Research in comprehension in reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 3, 499-545.
31. Dowhower, S. L. (1987). Effects of repeated reading on second-grade transitional reader' fluency and comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 389-406.
32. Duffy, G. G., & Huffman, J. V. (1999). In pursuit of an illusion: The flawed search for a perfect method. The Reading Teacher, 53, 10-15.
33. Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (1981). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
34. Edmondson, J., & Shannon, P. (2002). The will of the people. The Reading Teacher, 55, 452-454.
35. Ehri, L. C. (1992). Reconceptualizing the development of sight word reading and its relationship to recoding. In P. Gough, L. Ehri, & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 107-143). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
36. Elmore, R. F., & Burney, D. (1998). The challenge of school variability: Improving instruction in New York City's Community School District #2. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania, Center for Policy Research in Education.
37. Elmore, R. F., Peterson, P., & McCarthy, S. J. (1996). Restructuring in the classroom: Teaching, learning, and school organization. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
38. Everitt, B. (1974). Cluster analysis. New York: Wiley.
39. Firestone, W. A., Mayrowetz, D., & Fairman, J. (1998). Performance-based assessment and instructional change: The effects of testing in Maine and Maryland. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20, 95-114.
40. Fox, K. R. (2001). The formation of the Governor's reading initiative: A descriptive policy study in reading. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Reading Conference, San Antonio, TX.
41. Goldberg, G. L., & Kapinus, B. (1993). Problematic responses to reading performance assessment tasks: Sources and implications. Applied Measurement in Education, 6, 281-305.
42. Goodnough, A. (2001, May 23). Teaching by the book, no asides allowed [Electronic version]. The New York Times.
43. Gough, P. B., Hoover, W., & Peterson, C. L. (1996). Some observations on the simple view of reading. In C. Cornoldi & J. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties (pp. 1-13). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
44. Grossman, P. L., Thompson, C., & Valencia, S. W. (in press). Focusing the concerns of new teachers: The district as teacher educator. In A. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. A. Marsh, & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), The school district and instructional renewal: Opening the conversation. New York: Teachers College Press.
45. Harris, A. J., & Sipay, E. R. (1991). How to increase reading ability (9th ed.). New York: Longman.
46. Harris, R., (2000, May 29). Genetic Research [Radio]. Morning Edition, National Public Radio.
47. Hiebert, E. H., & Taylor, B. M. (Eds.). (1994). Getting reading right from the start: Effective early literacy interventions. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
48. Hochstatter, H. (1998, February 25). Johnny can't read because Johnny needs phonics. The Seattle Times. Retrieved September 23, 2002 from http://archives. seattletimes.nwsource.com/web/index.html.
49. Hoien, T., Lundberg, I., Stanovich, K. E., Bjaalid, I. K. (1995). Components of phonological awareness. Reading and Writing, 7, 171-188.
50. Jenkins, J. R., Johnson, E., & Hileman, J. (2001). When is reading also writing: Sources of individual differences on the new reading performance assessments. Unpublished manuscript, University of Washington.
51. Klein, S. P., Hamilton, L. S., McCaffrey, D. F., & Stecher, B. M. (2000). What do test scores in Texas tell us? [Electronic version]. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(49). Retrieved September 19, 2002 from: http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n49/.
52. Ko, M. (1997, March 8). Locke, GOP reach deal to pass phonics-based education bill. The Seattle Times. Retrieved September 23, 2002 from http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/web/index.html.
53. LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293-323.
54. Leslie, L., & Caldwell, J. (1995). Qualitative Reading Inventory-II. New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.
55. Lewis, A. (2001). Benchmarks for accountability: Are we there yet? (CSE Technical Report 547). Los Angeles, CA: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
56. Linn, R. L. (2000). Assessment and accountability. Educational Researcher, 29(2), 4-16.
57. Linn, R. L. (2001). Reporting school quality in standards-based accountability systems. (CRESST Policy Brief 3). Los Angles, CA: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
58. Lipson, M. Y., & Wixson, K. K. (1997). Assessment and instruction of reading and writing disability: An interactive approach (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
59. Marsh, J. (2000). Connecting districts to the policy dialogue: A review of literature on the relationship of districts with stales, schools, and communities (Working Paper). Seattle, WA: Center for Teaching and Policy.
60. McCracken, R. (1970). The teaching of reading: A primer. Klamath Falls, OR: Klamath.
61. McDaniel, J. E., & Miskel, C. G. (2001). The nature of influence in national reading policy making: The role of beliefs and the importance of collaboration. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Reading Conference, San Antonio, TX.
62. McDaniel, J. E., Sims, C. H., & Miskel, C. G. (2001). The national reading policy arena: Policy actors and perceived influence. Education Policy 15(1), 92-114.
63. McDonnell, L. (1994). Assessment policy as persuasion and regulation. American Journal of Education, 102, 394-420.
64. McDonnell, L., & Choisser, C. (1997). Testing and teaching: Local implementation of new state assessments. Los Angeles, CA: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
65. McLaughlin, M. W. (1987). Learning from experience: Lessons from policy implementation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9, 171-178.
66. McNeil, L. M. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized testing. New York: Routledge.
67. Nagy, W. E. (1988). Teaching vocabulary to Improve reading comprehension. Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills and the National Council of Teachers of English.
68. National Center for Education Statistics. (1996). NAEP 1994 reading report card for the nation and the states. (NCES Report No. 96045). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.
69. National Council on Education Standards and Testing. (1992). Raising standards for American education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
70. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
71. National Research Council. (1999). Testing, teaching, and learning: A guide for states and school districts. Committee on Title I testing and assessment, R. F. Elmore & R. Rothman, (Eds.), Board on Testing and Assessment, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
72. Nolen, S. B., Haladyna, T. M., & Haas, N. S. (1992). Uses and abuses of achievement test scores. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 11(2), 9-15.
73. Orlofsky, G. P., & Olson, L. (2001). The state of states. In Education Week (Ed.), A better balance: Standards, tests, and the tools to succeed. Volume XX, Number 17 (pp. 86-108). Bethesda, MD: Author.
74. Paterson, F. R. A. (2000). The politics of phonics. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 15, 179-211.
75. Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York: Oxford University Press.
76. Pinnell, G. S., Pikulski, J. J., Wixson, K. K., Campbell, J. R.,Gough, P. B., & Beatty, A. S. (1995). Listening to children read aloud. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
77. Place, N. A. (in press). Policy in action: The influence of mandated early reading assessment on teachers' thinking and practice. Fifty-first Yearbook of the National Reading Conference. Chicago, IL: National Reading Conference.
78. Popham, J. W., Cruse, K. L., Rankin, S. C., Sandifer, P. D., & Williams, P. L. (1985). Measurement-driven instruction: It's on the road. Phi Delta Kappan, 66, 628-634.
79. Resnick, L. B., & Resnick, D. P. (1992). Assessing the thinking curriculum: New tools for educational reform. In B. R. Gifford & M. C. O'Connor (Eds.), Changing assessments: Alternative views of aptitude, achievement, and instruction. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
80. Romesburg, H. C. (1984). Cluster analysis for researchers. Belmont, CA: Lifetime Learning Publications.
81. Scarborough, H. S., Ehri, L. C., Olson, R. K., Fowler, A. (1998). The fate of phonemic awareness beyond the elementary school years. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2, 115-142.
82. Shepard, L. A. (1991). Will national tests improve student learning? Phi Delta Kappan, 72, 232-238.
83. Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29, 4-14.
84. Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P., (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
85. Spear-Swerling, L., & Sternberg, R. J. (1994, April). Educational implications of an interactive model of reading disability. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. San Francisco, CA.
86. Speece, D. L. (1994). Cluster analysis in perspective. Exceptionality, 5, 31-44.
87. Spillane, J. P. (1996). School districts matter: Local educational authorities and state instructional policy. Educational Policy, 10, 63-87.
88. Spillane, J. P. (2000). Cognition and policy implementation: District policymakers and the reform of mathematics education. Cognition and Instruction, 18(2), 141-179.
89. Spillane, J. P., & Jennings, N. E. (1997). Aligned instructional policy and ambitious pedagogy: Exploring instructional reform from the classroom perspective. Teachers College Record, 98, 449-481.
90. Spillane, J. P., & Thompson, C. L. (1997), Reconstructing conceptions of local capacity: The local education agency's capacity for ambitious instruction reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19, 185-203.
91. Stahl, S. A., & Murray, B. (1998). Issues involved in defining phonological awareness and its relation to early reading. In J. L. Metsala & L. C. Ehri (Eds.), Word recognition in beginning literacy (pp. 65-88). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
92. Standerford, N. S. (1997). Reforming reading instruction on multiple levels: Interrelations and disconnections across the state, district, and classroom levels. Educational Policy, 11, 58-91.
93. Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 360-407.
94. Stanovich, K. E. (1994). Romance and reality. The Reading Teacher, 47, 280-290.
95. Stein, M. K., & D'Amico, L. (in press). District as a professional learning laboratory. In A. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. A. Marsh, & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), The school district and instructional renewal: Opening the conversation. New York: Teachers College Press.
96. Taylor, C. S. (1998). Assessment of student learning: Grade 4 technical report. Olympia, WA: Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction.
97. Taylor, S. E. (1965). Eye movements in reading: Facts and fallacies. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 193-205.
98. Valencia, S. W., & Wixson, K. K. (2001). Literacy policy and policy research that makes a difference. In J. V. Hoffman, D. L. Schallert, C. M. Fairbanks, J. Worthy, & B. Malock (Eds.), The Fiftieth Yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 21-43). Chicago, IL: National Reading Conference.
99. Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. T., & Rashotte, C. A. (1994). The development of reading-related phonological processing abilities: New evidence of bidirectional causality from a latent variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 30, 73-78.
100. Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1999). The Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing. Austin, TX: Pro Ed.
101. th grade test: A guide for parents. Olympia, WA: Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction.
102. Washington State Legislature. (1998). Successful Readers Act, Washington State legislature. E2SSB 6509.
103. Wixson, K. K., Valencia, S. W., & Lipson, M. Y. (1994). Issues in literacy assessment: Facing the realities of internal and external assessment. Journal of Reading Behavior, 26, 315-337.
104. Wolf, S. A., Borko, H., Elliott, R. L., & McIver, M. C. (2000). That dog won't hunt: Exemplary school change efforts within the Kentucky reform. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 349-393.
105. Woodcock, R. W., & Johnson, M. B. (1989). Woodcock-Johnson Psychoeducational Battery-Revised. Alien, TX: Psychological Corporation.