The present study investigated some psychometric properties of the Basic Reading Inventory (BRI), a widely used informal reading inventory. The BRI and Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) probes were administered to 149 third, fourth, and fifth graders. Test–retest and alternate forms reliability analyses indicated adequate levels of reliability for low-stakes decisions. Concurrent validity analyses indicated strong correlations with DIBELS, an established measure of reading fluency. These results are discussed in light of implications for use of the BRI for making instructional grouping, universal screening, and progress monitoring decisions.
American Education Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: Author.
2.
AndersonW. W. (1977). Commercial reading inventories: A comparative view. Reading World, 17, 99-104.
3.
ArdoinS. P.ChristT. J. (2008). Evaluating curriculum-based measurement slope estimates using data from triannual universal screenings. School Psychology Review, 37, 109-125.
4.
ArthaudT. J.VasaS. F.AllenL. (2000). Reading assessment and instructional practices in special education. Diagnostique, 25, 205-227.
BargerJ. (2003). Comparing the DIBELS oral reading fluency indicator and the North Carolina end of grade reading assessment (Technical report). Asheville: North Carolina Teacher Academy. Retrieved from http://dibels.uoregon.edu/docs/techreports/NC_Tech_Report.pdf
7.
BieberG. A. (2007). An analysis of the Basic Reading Inventory. Unpublished manuscript.
8.
BieberG. A. (2008, December). Predicting language arts grades: Using the Basic Reading Inventory. Poster presented at the meeting of Correlational Analysis, Vermillion, SD.
9.
BlockC. C. (2003). Literacy difficulties: Diagnosis and instruction for reading specialists and classroom teachers (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
10.
BristowP. S.PikulskiJ. J.PelosiP. L. (1983). A comparison of five estimates of reading instructional level. The Reading Teacher, 37, 273-279.
11.
BuckJ.TorgesenJ. (2003). The relationship between performance on a measure of oral reading fluency and performance on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCRR Technical Report No. 1). Tallahassee: Florida Center for Reading Research. Retrieved from http://dibels.uoregon.edu/docs/techreports/fcrr_fcat_report.pdf
12.
BurnsM. K. (2003). Test review of the Basic Reading Inventory (8th edition). In PlakeB. S.ImparaJ. C.SpiesR. A. (Eds.) Fifteenth Mental Measurements Yearbook (pp.101-103). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute.
ChristT. J.ArdoinS. P. (2009). Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading: Passage equivalence and probe-set development. Journal of School Psychology, 47, 55-75.
15.
ChristT. J.HintzeJ. M. (2007). Psychometric considerations of reliability when evaluating response to intervention. In JimmersonS. R.VanderheydenA. M.BurnsM. K. (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention (pp. 93-105). New York, NY: Springer.
16.
ChristT. J.SilberglittB. (2007). Estimates of the standard error of measurement for curriculum-based measures of oral reading fluency. School Psychology Review, 36, 130-146.
CrockerL.AlginaJ. (2008). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.
19.
DenoS. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219-232.
20.
DenoS. L. (1992). The nature and development of curriculum-based measurement. Preventing School Failure, 36, 5-10.
21.
DuffelmeyerF. A.DuffelmeyerB. B. (1989). Are IRI passages suitable for assessing main idea comprehension?The Reading Teacher, 42, 358-363.
22.
FlippoR. F.HollandD. A. D.McCarthyM. T.SwinningE. A. (2009). Asking the right questions: How to select an informal reading inventory. The Reading Teacher, 63, 79-83.
23.
FordM. P.OptizM. F. (2008). A national survey of guided reading practices: What we can learn from primary teachers. Literary Research and Instruction, 47, 309-337.
24.
FuchsL. S.ButterworthJ. R.FuchsD. (1989). Effects of ongoing curriculum-based measurement on student awareness of goals and progress. Education and Treatment of Children, 12, 63-72.
25.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.SteckerP. M. (1989). Effects of curriculum-based measurement on teachers’ instructional planning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 51-59.
26.
GoodR. H.KaminskiR. A. (2002). Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement.
27.
GriffithsA. J.VanDerHeydenA. M.SkokutM.LillesE. (2009). Progress monitoring in oral reading fluency within the context of RTI. School Psychology Quarterly, 24, 13-23.
28.
Helgren-LempesisV. A.MangrumC. T.II. (1986). An analysis of alternate-form reliability of three commercially prepared informal reading inventories. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 209-215.
JohnsJ. L. (2005). Basic Reading Inventory: Pre-primer through grade twelve and early literacy assessments (9th ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
32.
JohnsJ. L. (2008). Basic Reading Inventory: Pre-primer through grade twelve and early literacy assessments (10th ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
33.
JohnsJ. L. (2012). Basic Reading Inventory: Pre-primer through grade twelve and early literacy assessments (11th ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
34.
JohnsJ. L.L’AllierS. K. (2004). How preservice teachers score an informal reading inventory: Strengths and weaknesses. In DuganJ. R.LinderP. E.SampsonM. B.BrancotoB.Elish-PiperL. (Eds.), Twenty-sixth yearbook of the college reading association (pp. 254-267). Commerce, TX: College Reading Association.
35.
JongsmaK. S.JongsmaE. A. (1981). Test review: Commercial informal reading inventories. The Reading Teacher, 34, 697-705.
36.
KaneM. T. (2013). Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50, 1-73.
37.
LipsonM. Y.WixsonK. K. (2003). Assessment and instruction of reading and writing difficulty: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
38.
McLoughlinJ. A.LewisR. B. (2005). Assessing students with special needs (6th ed.). Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice Hall.
39.
NilssonN. L. (2008). A critical analysis of eight informal reading inventories. The Reading Teacher, 61, 526-536.
40.
PetscherY.CummingsK. D.BiancarosaG.FienH. (2013). Advanced (measurement) applications of curriculum-based measurement in reading. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 38, 71-75.
41.
PikulskiJ. J. (1974). A critical review: Informal reading inventories. The Reading Teacher, 28, 141-151.
42.
PikulskiJ. J.ShanahanT. (1982). Informal reading inventories: A critical analysis. In PikulskiJ. J.ShanahonT. (Eds.), Approaches to the informal evaluation of reading (pp. 82-107). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
43.
PoncyB. C.SkinnerC. H.AxtellP. K. (2005). An investigation of the reliability and standard error of measurement of words read correctly per minute using curriculum-based measurement. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23, 326-338.
44.
SalviaJ.YsseldykeJ. E.BoltS. (2010). Assessment in special and inclusive education (11th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
45.
SchillingS. G.CarlisleJ. F.ScottS. E.ZengJ. (2007). Are fluency measures accurate predictors of reading achievement?The Elementary School Journal, 107, 429-448.
46.
ShawR.ShawD. (2002). DIBELS oral reading fluency-based indicators of third grade reading skills for Colorado State Assessment Program (CSAP) (Technical report). Eugene: University of Oregon.
47.
SpectorJ. (2005). How reliable are informal reading inventories?Psychology in the Schools, 42, 593-603.
48.
SpeigelD. L. (1995). A comparison of traditional remedial programs and reading recovery: Guidelines for success for all programs. The Reading Teacher, 49, 86-96.
49.
TaylorR. L. (2003). Assessment of exceptional students: Educational and psychological procedures (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
50.
Vander MeerC. D.LentzF. E.StollarS. (2005). The relationship between oral reading fluency and Ohio proficiency testing in reading (Technical report). Eugene: University of Oregon.
51.
WalpoleS.McKennaM. C. (2006). The role of informal reading inventories in assessing word recognition. The Reading Teacher, 59, 592-594.
52.
WarnerR. A. (2008). Applied statistics: From bivariate through multivariate techniques. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
53.
WilsonJ. (2005). The relationship of Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) oral reading fluency to performance on Arizona Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS) (Research brief). Tempe, AZ: Assessment and Evaluation Department Tempe School District No. 3.
