The goal of the current study was to compare two forms of dynamic assessment and standard assessment of preschool children’s phonological awareness. The first form of dynamic assessment was a form of scaffolding in which item formats were modified in response to an error so as to make the task easier or more explicit. The second form of dynamic assessment was direct instruction of the phonological awareness tasks. The results indicate that preschool children’s phonological awareness can be assessed using standard assessment procedures, provided the items require processing units larger than the individual phoneme. No advantage was found in reliability or validity for either dynamic assessment condition relative to the standard assessment condition. Dynamic assessment does not appear to improve reliability or validity of phonological awareness assessments when preschool children are given tasks that they can perform using standard administration procedures.
Anthony, J.L., & Francis, D.J. ( 2005). Development of phonological awareness. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 255-259.
2.
Berninger, V.W., Abbott, R.D., Vermeulen, K., Ogier, S., Brooksher, R., Zook, D., & Lemos, Z. ( 2002). Comparison of faster and slower responders to early intervention in reading: Differentiating features of their language profiles. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 25, 59-76.
3.
Caffrey, E., Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L.S. ( 2008). The predictive validity of dynamic assessment. Journal of Special Education, 41, 254-270.
4.
Coyne, M.D., Kame’enui, E., Simmons, D.C., & Harn, B.A. ( 2004). Beginning reading intervention as inoculation or insulin: First-grade reading performance of strong responders to kindergarten instruction . Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 90-104.
5.
Day, J.D., Englehardt, J.L., Maxwell, S.E., & Bolig, E.E. ( 1997). Comparison of static and dynamic assessment procedures and their relation to independent performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 358-368.
6.
Fletcher, J.M., Lyon, G.R., Fuchs, L.S., & Barnes, M.A. ( 2007). Learning disabilities: From identification to intervention . New York, NY: Guilford.
7.
Gredler, G.R. ( 1997). Issues in early childhood screening and assessment. Psychology in Schools, 34, 99-105.
8.
Grigorenko, E.L. ( 2009). Dynamic assessment and response to intervention: Two sides of one coin. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 111-132.
Hogan, T.P., Catts, H.W., & Little, T.D. ( 2005). The relationship between phonological awareness and reading: Implications for the assessment of phonological awareness. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 36, 285-293.
11.
Lidz, C.S., & Pena, E. D. (2009). Response to intervention and dynamic assessment: Do we just appear to be speaking the same language? Seminars in Speech and Language, 30, 121-133.
12.
Lonigan, C.J. ( 2006). Development, assessment, and promotion of preliteracy skills. Early Education and Development, 17, 91-114.
13.
Lonigan, C.J., Burgess, S.R., & Anthony, J.L. ( 2000). Development of emergent literacy and early reading skills in preschool children: Evidence from a latent-variable longitudinal study . Developmental Psychology, 36, 596-613.
14.
Lonigan, C.J., Burgess, S.R., Anthony, J.L., & Barker, T.A. ( 1998). Development of phonological sensitivity in 2- to 5-year-old children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 294-311.
15.
Lonigan, C.J., Wagner, R.K., Torgesen, J.K., & Rashotte, C.A. (2007). Test of Preschool Early Literacy. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read (No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
18.
Olswang, L.B., & Bain, B.A. ( 1996). Assessment information for predicting upcoming change in language production. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research , 39, 414-423.
19.
Reid, D., Hresko, W., & Hammill, D. ( 2001). Test of Early Reading Ability (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
20.
Schafer, J.L. ( 1999). NORM: Multiple imputation of incomplete multivariate data under a normal model, Version 2. Retrieved from http://www.stat.psu.edu/~jls/misoftwa.html
21.
Shepard, L., Kagan, S. L., & Wurtz, E. (Eds.). (1998). Principles and recommendations for early childhood assessments. Washington, DC: National Education Goals Panel.
22.
Snow, C.E., Burns, M.S., & Griffin, P. ( 1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
23.
Spector, J.E. ( 1992). Predicting progress in beginning reading: Dynamic assessment of phonemic awareness. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 353-363.
24.
Swanson, H.L., & Lussier, C.M. ( 2001). A selective synthesis of the experimental literature on dynamic assessment. Review of Educational Research, 71, 321-363.
Torgesen, J.K. ( 2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 55-64.
27.
Torgesen, J.K., Wagner, R.K., Rashotte, C.A., Burgess, S., & Hecht, S. ( 1997). Contributions of phonological awareness and rapid automatic naming ability to the growth of word reading skills in second- to fifth-grade children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 161-185.
28.
Wagner, R.K., Torgesen, J.K., & Rashotte, C.A. (1994). Development of reading-related phonological processing abilities: New evidence of bidirectional causality from a latent variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology , 30, 73-87.
29.
Wagner, R.K., Torgesen, J.K., Rashotte, C.A., Hecht, S.A., Barker, T.A., Burgess, S.R., . . . Garon, T. ( 1997). Changing relations between phonological processing abilities and word-level reading as children develop from beginning to skilled readers: A 5-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 33, 468-479.
30.
Whitehurst, G.J., & Lonigan, C.J. ( 1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child Development, 69, 848-872.
31.
Whitehurst, G.J., & Lonigan, C.J. ( 2001). Get Ready to Read! Screening Tool. New York, NY: National Center for Learning Disabilities .
