In this study, individual performance in reading aloud was manipulated experimentally, and the associated effects of these manipulations on comprehension measures were examined for individual cases. Results revealed that large but not small increases in reading aloud from text are indicative of improved performance on traditional comprehension tasks. Additional analyses revealed that criterion levels of oral reading performance are related to accuracy in answering comprehension questions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, R. C, Wilkinson, I. A. G., & Mason, J. M, (1991). A micro analysis of the small group, guided reading lesson: Effects of an emphasis on global story meaning. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 417--441.
2.
Carney, J. J., & Cioffi, G., (1990). Extending traditional diagnosis: The dynamic assessment of reading abilities. Reading Psychology: An International Quarterly, 11, 177--192.
3.
Deno, S. L, (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219--232.
4.
Deno, S. L., Mirkin, P., & Chiang, B., (1982). Identifying valid measures of reading. Exceptional Children, 49, 36--45.
5.
Ekwall, E. E, (1976). Diagnosis and remediation of the disabled reader. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
6.
Farr, R. C., & Carey, R. F, (1986). Reading: What can be measured? (2nd ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
7.
Fuchs, L. S., & Deno, S. L, (1991). Paradigmatic distinctions between instructionally-relevant measures models. Exceptional Children, 57, 488--500.
8.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Deno, S., (1982). Reliability and validity of curriculum-based informal reading inventories. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 16--26.
9.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L., (1988). The validity of informal reading comprehension measures. Remedial and Special Education, 9(2), 20--28.
10.
Gay, L. R, (1984). Educational research, competencies for analysis and application (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
11.
Jenkins, J., & Jewell, M., (1992). Validity of the Basic Academic Skill Samples (BASS). Diagnostique, 17, 273--288.
12.
Johns, J., (1992). How professionals view portfolio assessment. Reading Research and Instruction, 32(1), 1--10.
13.
Johnson, D. D., & Pearson, P. D, (1978). Teaching reading comprehension. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
14.
LaBerge, D., & Samuels, J. S, (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293--323.
15.
Linn, R., Baker, E., & Dunbar, S., (1991). Complex, performance-based assessment: Expectations and validation criteria. Educational Researcher, 20(8), 15--21.
16.
Marston, D., & Magnusson, D., (1985). Implementing curriculum-based measurement in special and regular education settings. Exceptional Children, 52, 266--275.
17.
Mirkin, P., Deno, S., Fuchs, L., Wesson, C., Tindal, G., Marston, D., & Kuehnle, K., (1981). Procedures to develop and monitor progress on IEP goals. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
18.
Shinn, M. R., Good, R. H, III, Knutson, N., Tilly, W. D, & Collins, V. L, (1992). Curriculum-based measurement reading fluency: A confirmatory analyses of its relationship to reading. School Psychology Review, 21, 459--479.
19.
Weiss, B. J., Evertts, E. L, Cruikshank, S. B, Steurer, L. O, & Hunt, L. C, (1983). Holt basic reading. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
