When is reading also writing: Sources of individual differences on the new reading performance assessments

Scientific Studies of Reading

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 125-151

  Jenkins, Joseph R ^a   Johnson, Evelyn ^a   Hileman, Jennifer ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b Lakewood School District   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 2642534243     PISSN: 10888438     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s1532799xssr0802_2     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Bussis, A., & Chittenden, E. (1987). Research currents: What the reading tests neglect. Language Arts, 64, 302-308.
2. Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical modern test theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
3. Espin, C. A., Skare, S., Shin, J., Deno, S. L., Robinson, S., & Brenner, B. (2000). Identifying indicators of growth in written expression for middle-school students. Journal of Special Education, 34, 140-153.
4. Farr, R., Pritchard, R., & Smitten, B. (1990). A description of what happens when an examinee takes a multiple-choice reading comprehension test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 209-226.
5. 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 Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
6. Gough, P. B., Juel, C., & Griffiths, P. L. (1992). Reading, spelling, and the orthographic cipher. In P. Gough, L. Ehri, & C. Juel (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 35-48). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
7. Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6-10.
8. Hayes, J. R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing (pp. 1-27). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
9. Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 3-30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
10. Heck, R. H., & Crislip, M. (2001). Direct and indirect writing assessments: Examining issues of equity and utility. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 275-292.
11. Hiebert, E. H. (1994). Becoming literate through authentic tasks: Evidence and adaptations. In R. B. Ruddell, M. R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 391-413). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
12. Hogan, T. P. (1981). Relationship between free-response and choice-type tests of achievement: A review of the literature. Washington DC: National Institute of Education.
13. Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2, 127-160.
14. Kapinus, B. A., Collier, G. V., & Kruglanski, H. (1984). The Maryland School Performance Assessment Program: A new view of assessment. In S. Valencia, E. Hiebert, & P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Authentic reading assessment: Practices and possibilities (pp. 255-276). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
15. Kellogg, R. T. (1996). A model of working memory in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 57-72). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
16. Langer, J. A. (1985). Levels of questioning: An alternative view. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 586-602.
17. Langer, J. A. (1986). Reading, writing, and understanding: An analysis of the construction of meaning. Written Communication, 3, 219-267.
18. Langer, J. A., Campbell, J. R., Neuman, S. B., Mullis, I. V. S., Persky, H. R., & Donahue, P. L. (1995). Reading assessment redesigned. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.
19. Marston, D., & Deno, S. L. (1981). The reliability of simple, direct measures of written expression (Research Rep. No. 50). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
20. McCormick, S. (1992). Disabled readers' erroneous responses to inferential: Description and analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 54-77.
21. Pearson, P. D., & Johnson, D. D. (1978). Teaching reading comprehension. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
22. Purves, A., Li, H., & Shirk, M. (1990). Comparison of measures of the domain of learning in literature. Albany, NY: Center for the Learning and Teaching of Literature.
23. Quality counts '99: Demanding results. (1999). Education Week on the Web, 18, 5.
24. Shanahan, T. (1984). Nature of the reading-writing relation: An explanatory multivariate analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 466-477.
25. Shanahan, T., & Lomax, R. G. (1986). An analysis and comparison of theoretical models of the reading-writing relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 116-123.
26. Taylor, C. S. (1998). Assessment of student learning: Grade 4 technical report. Olympia, WA: Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction.
27. Tierney, R. J., & Shanahan, T. (1991). Research on the reading-writing relationship: Interactions, transactions, and outcomes. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 246-280). New York: Longman.
28. Tindal, G., & Parker, R. (1991). Identifying measures for evaluating written expression. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 6, 211-218.
29. Valencia, S., & Pearson, D. P. (1987). Reading assessment: Time for a change. The Reading Teacher, 40, 726-732.
30. Van den Bergh, H. (1990). On the construct validity of multiple-choice items for reading comprehension. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 1-12.
31. Washington Assessment of Student Learning: Example Test Grade 4. (1997). Olympia, WA: State of Washington, Superintendent of Public Instruction.
32. Woodcock, R. (1987). Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests-Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.