Reconciling DIBELS and OSELA: What every childhood educator should know

Journal of Research in Childhood Education

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 41-51

  Li, Xiaoping ^a   Zhang, Mingyuan ^a  

^a CENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 55149100078     PISSN: 02568543     EISSN: 21502641     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02568540809594645     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Afflerbach, P. (2007). Understanding and using reading assessment K-12. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
2. Center, Y., Wheldall, K., Freeman, L., Outhred, L., & McNaught, M. (1995). An evaluation of Reading Recovery. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 240-263.
3. Chapman, J. W., Tunmer, W. E., & Prochnow, J. E. (2001). Does success in the Reading Recovery program depend on developing proficiency in phonological-processing skills? A longitudinal study in a whole language instructional context. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 141-176.
4. Clay, M. M. (2002). An observation survey of early literacy achievement (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
5. Cooter, R. B., Flynt, E. S., & Cooter, K. S. (2007). Comprehensive reading inventory: Measuring reading development in regular and special education classroom. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
6. Cowen, J. E. (2003). A balanced approach to beginning instruction: A synthesis of six major U.S. research studies. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
7. Denton, C. A., Ciancio, D. J., & Fletcher, J. M. (2006). Validity, reliability, and utility of the observation survey of early literacy achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 8-34.
8. Elbaum, B., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M. T., & Moody, S. W. (2000). How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs for reading for elementary student at risk for reading failure? A metaanalysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 605-619.
9. Farr, R., & Beck, M. D. (2003). Evaluating language development. In J. Flood, D. Lapp, J. R. Squire, and J. M. Jensen (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (2nd ed., pp. 590-599). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10. Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (1996). Guided reading. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
11. Gipps, C. (1999). Socio-cultural aspects of assessment. Review of Research in Education, 24, 355-392.
12. Glynn, T., Bethune, N., Crooks, T., Ballard, K., & Smith, J. (1992). Reading recovery in context: Implementation and outcomes. Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Education Psychology, 12, 249-261.
13. Gomez-Bellenge, F. X., & Rodgers, E. M. (2004). Reading Recovery and Descubriendo la Lectura National Report 2002—2003. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University National Data Evaluation Center. Retrieved December 16, 2004, from www.ndec.us
14. Good, R. H., & Kaminski, R. A. (Eds.). (2002). Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement.
15. Goodman, K. S. (2006). A critical review of DIBELS. In K. S. Goodman (Ed.), The truth about DIBELS: What it is, what it does (pp. 1-39). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
16. Groff, P. (2004). A critical analysis of the sources of Reading Recovery: An empiricist perspective. Interchange, 35(1), 31-58.
17. Hamilton, R., & Ghatala, E. (1994). Learning and instruction. New York: McGraw-Hill.
18. Hoffman, J. V., Au, K. H., Harrison, C., Paris, S. G., Pearson, P. D., Santa, C. M., Silver, S. H., & Valencia, S. W. (1999). High-stakes assessment in reading: Consequences, concerns, and common sense. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
19. Hoffman, J. V., Paris, S. G., Sala, R., Patterson, E., & Assaf, L. (2003). High-stakes assessment in the language arts: The piper plays, the players dance, but who pays the price? In J. Flood, D. Lapp, J. R. Squire, & J. M. Jensen (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (2nd ed., pp. 619-630). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20. Johnston, P., & Costello, P. (2005). Principles for literacy assessment. Reading Research Quarterly, 4(2), 256-267.
21. Kamii, C., & Manning, M. (2005). Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (DIBELS): A tool for evaluating student learning? Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 20(2), 75-90.
22. Lewis, A. C. (2006). Washington scene. Education Digest, 72(3), 70-72.
23. Linn, M. C. (1992). Gender differences in educational achievement. J. Pfleiderer (Ed.), Sex equity in educational opportunity, achievement, and testing. [Proceedings of 1991 Educational Testing Service Invitational Conference] (pp. 2-50). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
24. Manzo, K. K. (2005). National clout of DIBELS test draws scrutiny. Education Week, 25(5), 1, 12.
25. Moats, L. (2007). Whole-language high jinks: How to tell when “scientifically-based reading instruction” isn’t. Washington, DC: The Thomas B. Fordham Foundation. Retrieved April 22, 2008, from www.edexcellence.net/doc/Moats2007.pdf
26. 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.
27. National Council of Teachers of English. (2008). 2008 NCTE legislative platform. Retrieved March 10, 2008, from www.ncte.org/about/over/positions/category/gov/129125.htm
28. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
29. Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2004). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
30. Pearson, P. D. (2004). The reading wars. Educational Policy, 18, 216-252.
31. Pearson, P. D. (2006). Foreword. In K. S. Goodman (Ed.), The truth about DIBELS: What it is, what it does (pp. v-xix). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
32. Reutzel, D. R., & Cooter, R. B. (2004). Teaching children to read: Putting the pieces together. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
33. Reynolds, M., & Wheldall, K. (2007). Reading Recovery 20 years down the track: Looking forward, looking back. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 54(2), 199-223.
34. Riedel, B. W. (2007). The relation between DIBELS, reading comprehension, and vocabulary in urban first-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(4), 546-562.
35. Samuels, S. J. (2007). The DIBELS tests: Is speed of barking at print what we mean by reading fluency? Reading Research Quarterly, 42(4), 563-566.
36. Shepard, L. A. (2001). The role of classroom assessment in teaching and learning. In V. Richards, (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 1066-1101). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
37. Sulzby, E. (1991). The development of the young child and the emergence of literacy. In J. Flood, J. M. Jensen, D. Lapp, & J. R. Squire (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (pp. 273-285). New York: Macmillan.
38. Sutherland, G. (1996). Assessment: Some historical perspectives. In H. Goldstein & T. Lewis (Eds.), Assessment: Problems, developments and statistical issues. Chichester, England: Wiley.
39. Teale, W. (1994). Emergent literacy. In Encyclopedia of English studies and language arts: A project of the National Council of Teachers of English (Vol. 1, pp. 424-426). New York: Scholastic.
40. Tierney, R. (1999). Literacy assessment reform: Shifting beliefs, principled possibilities, and emerging practices. In S. J. Barrentine (Ed.), Reading assessment: Principles and practices for elementary teachers (pp. 10-29). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
41. U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Inspector General. (2006). The Reading First program grant application process. Final Inspection Report. ED-OIG/I13-F0017. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved April 22, 2008, www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oig/aire-ports/i13f0017.pdf