Story retell: A fluency-based indicator of reading comprehension

School Psychology Quarterly

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 304-317

  Roberts, Greg ^a   Good, Roland ^b   Corcoran, Stephanie ^c,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA   (United States)

^d Shelby County School System   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 27944466087     PISSN: 10453830     EISSN: 10453830     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1521/scpq.2005.20.3.304     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (40)

1. Buck, J., & Torgeson, J. (2003). The relationship between performance on a measure of oral reading fluency and performance on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCCR Tech. Rep. No. 1). Florida Center for Reading Research, Tallahassee, FL.
2. Crawford, L., Tindal, G., & Stieber, S. (2001). Using oral reading rate to predict student performance on statewide achievement tests. Educational Assessment, 7(4), 303-323.
3. Deno, S. (1986). Formative evaluation of individual student programs: A new role for school psychologists. School Psychology Review, 15, 358-374.
4. Deno, S., Mirkin, P., & Chiang, B. (1982). Identifying valid measures of reading. Exceptional Children, 49, 35-45.
5. Deno, S. (1992). The nature and development of curriculum-based measurement. Preventing School Failure, 36(2), 5-10.
6. Deno, S., Fuchs, L., Marston, D., & Shin, J. (2001). Using curriculum-based measurement to establish growth standards for students with learning disabilities. School Psychology Review, 30(4), 507-524.
7. Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219-232.
8. Fewster, S., & MacMillan, P. (2002). School-based evidence for the validity of curriculum-based measurement of reading and writing. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 149-156.
9. Fuchs, L., & Deno, S. (1991). Paradigmatic distinctions between instructionally relevant measurement models. Exceptional Children, 57, 488-501.
10. Fuchs, L., & Fuchs, D. (1999). Monitoring student progress toward the development of reading competence: A review of three forms of classroom-based assessment. School Psychology Review, 28, 659-671.
11. Fuchs, L., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. (1988). The validity of informal reading comprehension measures. Remedial and Special Education, 9(2), 20-28.
12. Fuchs, L., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M., & Jenkins, J. ( 2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 239-256.
13. Fuchs, L., Fuchs, D., & Hamlett, C. (1989). Effects of instrumental use of curriculum-based measurement to enhance instructional programs. Remedial and Special Education, 10, 43-52.
14. Good, R., & Jefferson, G. (1998). Contemporary perspectives on curriculum-based measurement validity. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement. New York: The Guilford Press.
15. Good, R., Simmons, D., & Kame'enui, E. (2001). The importance and decision-making utility of a continuum of fluency-based indicators of foundational reading skills for third-grade high-stakes outcomes. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 257-288.
16. Hamilton, C. (2001). The "word caller" phenomenon: Teachers' judgments on reading comprehension and fluency (Doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, 2001). Dissertation Abstracts International, 62(06), 2027.
17. Hos, J. L., & Reschly, D. J. (2002). Regional differences in school psychology practice. School Psychology Review, 31, 11-29.
18. Howell, K. W. (1986). Direct assessment of academic performance. School Psychology Review, 15, 324-335.
19. Jenkins, J., Fuchs, L., Espin, C., van den Broek, P., & Deno, S. (2000). Effects of task format and performance dimension on word reading measures: Criterion validity, sensitivity to impairment, and context facilitation. Paper presented at the Pacific Coast Research Conference, San Diego, CA.
20. Kaminski, R., & Good, R. (1996). Toward a technology for assessing basic early literacy skills. School Psychology Review, 25, 215-227.
21. LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293-323.
22. Logan, G. (1997). Automaticity and reading: Perspectives from the instance theory of automatization. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 13, 123-146.
23. Markell, M., & Deno, S. (1997). Effects of increasing oral reading: Generalization across reading tasks. The Journal of Special Education, 31(2), 233-250.
24. Marston, D. (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: What is it and why do it? In M.R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 18-78). New York: Guilford Press.
25. Marston, D., Fuchs, L., & Deno, S. (1985). Measuring pupil progress: A comparison of standardized achievement tests and curriculum-related measures. Diagnostique, 11(2), 77-90.
26. Marston D., Mirkin, P., & Deno, D. (1984). Curriculum-based measurement: An alternative to traditional screening, referral, and identification. Journal of Special Education, 18, 109-117.
27. Nathan, R., & Stanovich, K. (1991). The causes and consequences of differences in reading fluency. Theory Into Practice, 30, 176-184.
28. 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.
29. Perfetti, C. (1995). Cognitive research can inform reading education. Journal of Research in Reading, 18(2), 106-115.
30. Peverly, S. T., & Kitzen, K. R. (1998). Curriculum based assessment of reading skills: Consideration and caveats for school psychologists. Psychology in the Schools, 35(1), 29-47.
31. Rosenfeld, S. A. (1987). Instructional consultation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. Rosenfeld, S. A., & Shinn, M. R. (Eds.). (1989). Mini-series on curriculum based assessment. School Psychology Review, 18, 299-370.
33. Salvia, J., & Ysseldyke, J. (1998). Using estimated true scores: A response to Sabers, Feldt, and Reschly. Journal of Special Education, 22(3), 367-373.
34. Shapiro, E. S. (1990). An integrated model for curriculum based assessment. School Psychology Review, 19, 331-349.
35. Shapiro, E. S., & Elliott, S. N. (1999). Curriculum-based assessment and other performance-based assessment strategies. In C. R. Reynolds & T. B. Gutkin (Eds.), The handbook of school psychology. New York: Wiley.
36. Shinn, M. (1998). Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement. New York: The Guilford Press.
37. Shinn, M., Good, R., Knutson, N., Tilly, W., & Collins, V. (1992). Curriculum-based measurement reading fluency: A confirmatory factor analysis of its relation to reading. School Psychology Review, 21, 459-479.
38. Stanovich, K. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundations and new frontiers. New York: The Guilford Press.
39. Stoner, G., Scarpati, S., Phaneuf, R., & Hintze, J. (2002). Using curriculum-based measurement to evaluate intervention efficacy. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 24(1/2), 101-112.
40. Woodcock, R. W., & Johnson, M. B. (1997). Diagnostic Reading Battery (WDRB). Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.