Explaining Reading Variance by Student Subgroup: Should We Move beyond Oral Reading Fluency?

Autor/inn/en	Amendum, Steven J.; Conradi Smith, Kristin; Liebfreund, Meghan D.
Titel	Explaining Reading Variance by Student Subgroup: Should We Move beyond Oral Reading Fluency?
Quelle	In: Journal of Research in Reading, 44 (2021) 4, S.757-786 (30 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Amendum, Steven J.)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0141-0423
DOI	10.1111/1467-9817.12371
Schlagwörter	Oral Reading; Reading Fluency; Curriculum Based Assessment; Reading Tests; High Stakes Tests; Reading Comprehension; Elementary School Students; Grade 3; Achievement Tests; Predictor Variables; Scores; Socioeconomic Status; Limited English Speaking; Race; Ethnicity + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Oral work; Reading; Mündliche Übung; Leseprozess; Lesen; Lesetest; Leseverstehen; School year 03; 3. Schuljahr; Schuljahr 03; Achievement test; Achievement; Testing; Test; Tests; Leistungsbeurteilung; Leistungsüberprüfung; Leistung; Testdurchführung; Testen; Prädiktor; Socio-economic status; Sozioökonomischer Status; Rasse; Abstammung; Ethnizität
Abstract	Background: Studies have demonstrated strong predictive and concurrent validity of curriculum-based measures (CBMs) with high-stakes reading tests, mainly using oral reading fluency (ORF) to predict outcomes. Some studies have found that CBMs' predictive accuracy might vary across demographic subgroups of students. In this study, we investigate whether additional CBMs of reading comprehension account for variance beyond ORF and whether these reading variables predict reading comprehension differently for demographic subgroups. Methods: Curriculum-based measures were administered to 9,967 students at the end of Grade 3 in the United States, concurrent with a high-stakes standardised state reading comprehension achievement test (RCAT). Hierarchical regression models with RCAT as the outcome were used to test: (1) whether CBMs of reading comprehension accounted for significant variance beyond ORF; and (2) if the reading variables differentially predicted RCAT for different subgroups of students. Results: Oral reading fluency explained significant variation in RCAT, and the addition of comprehension CBMs accounted for small amounts of unique variance. The contribution of ORF in explaining variation in reading comprehension varied by demographic subgroups. Conclusions: The contributions of comprehension CBMs in predicting high-stakes standardised reading comprehension tests were not meaningful, only accounting for small amounts of unique variance. Additionally, the contribution of ORF in explaining variation in the high-stakes standardised reading comprehension test varied by student demographics, likely due to complex reasons specific to those individual factors. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01