The construct and predictive validity of a dynamic assessment of young children learning to read: Implications for RTI frameworks

Journal of Learning Disabilities

Volumn 44, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 339-347

  Fuchs, Douglas ^a   Compton, Donald L ^a   Fuchs, Lynn S ^a   Bouton, Bobette ^a   Caffrey, Erin ^b  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Congressional Research Service ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

beginning reading assessment; dynamic assessment; RTI

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; AWARENESS; CHILD; COMPREHENSION; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMPULSIVENESS; LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT; LEARNING; LINGUISTICS; MALE; PHONETICS; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; READING; RESTLESSNESS; STUDENT; VALIDATION STUDY;

ATTENTION; AWARENESS; CHILD; CHILD LANGUAGE; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; COMPREHENSION; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMPULSIVE BEHAVIOR; MALE; PHONETICS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PSYCHOMOTOR AGITATION; READING; STUDENTS; VERBAL LEARNING; VOCABULARY;

EID: 80053265193     PISSN: 00222194     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0022219411407864     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). The standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
2. American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
3. Bus, A.G., & Ijzendoorn, M.H. (1999). Phonological awareness and early reading: A meta-analysis of experimental training studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 403-414.
4. Caffrey, E., Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L.S. (2008). The predictive validity of dynamic assessment: A review. Journal of Special Education, 41, 254-270.
5. Carroll, J.B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor analytic studies. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
6. Compton, D.L. (2000). Modeling the growth of decoding skills in first-grade children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 4, 219-258.
7. Cutting, L.E., & Scarborough, H.S. (2006). Prediction of reading comprehension: Relative contributions of word recognition, language proficiency, and other cognitive skills can depend on how comprehension is measured. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 277-299.
8. Fuchs, D. (2009). Dynamic assessment and RTI. Coronado, CA: Pacific Coast Research Conference.
9. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L.S., Compton, D.L., Bouton, B., Caffrey, E., & Hill, L. (2007). Dynamic assessment as responsiveness-to-intervention: A scripted protocol to identify young at-risk readers. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39, 58-63.
10. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L.S., Thompson, A., Al Otaiba, S., Yen, L., Yang, N., O'Connor, R. (2001). Is reading important in reading-readiness programs? A randomized field trial with teachers as program implementers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 251-267.
11. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Compton, D.L. (2004). Monitoring early reading development in first grade: Word identification fluency versus nonsense word fluency. Exceptional Children, 71, 7-21.
12. Grigorenko, E.L. (2009). Dynamic assessment and response to intervention: Two sides of one coin. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 111-132.
13. Grigorenko, E.L., & Sternberg, R.J. (1998). Dynamic testing. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 75-111.
14. Joshi, R.M., Williams, K.A., & Wood, J.R. (1998). Predicting reading comprehension from listening comprehension: Is this the answer to the IQ debate? In C. Hulme & R. M. Joshi (Eds.), Reading and spelling: Development and disorders (pp. 319-327). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. Psychological Corporation. (1999). Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Brace.
16. Raudenbush, S.W., Bryk, A.S., & Congdon, R. (2004). HOM 6 for Windows [computer software]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Systems International, Inc.
17. Spector, J.E. (1992). Predicting progress in beginning reading: Dynamic assessment of phonemic awareness. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 353-363.
18. Swanson, H.L., & Alexander, J.E. (1997). Cognitive processes as predictors of word recognition and reading comprehension in learning-disabled and skilled readers: Revisiting the specificity hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 128-158.
19. Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
20. Torgesen, J.K., Wagner, R.K., & Rashotte, C.A. (1997). Test of Word Reading Efficiency. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
21. Wagner, R.K., Torgesen, J.K., & Rashotte, C.A. (1999). Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
22. Woodcock, R.W. (1998). Woodcock Reading Mastery Test- Revised/Normative Update. Circle Pines, MN: AGS.
23. Woodcock, R.W., McGrew, K.S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Psychoeducational Ability. Itasca, IL: Riverside.