Running Records are thought to be an excellent formative assessment tool because they generate results that educators can use to make their teaching more responsive. Despite the technical nature of scoring Running Records and the kinds of important decisions that are attached to their analysis, few studies have investigated assessor accuracy. We measured precision across 114 teachers who were given a pre-coded Running Record to analyze by comparing their quantification and interpretation of the record against a scoring key. We also used Rasch measurement to examine which items teachers found easy and hard to score accurately. Analyses revealed wide variation in teachers’ accuracy, particularly in interpretation, that, according to item difficulty analysis, were caused by a few specific mistakes in scoring. Implications to improve training so that individuals administer Running Records more reliably are shared.
AdamsMJ (2013) Modeling the connections between word recognition and reading. In: AlvermannDEUnrauNJRuddellRB (eds) Theoretical models and processes of reading. 6th ed. Newark, DE: International Reading Association, pp.783–806.
2.
Rodgers EM, D'Agostino JV, Harmey SJ, Kelly RH and Brownfield K (2016) Examining the nature of scaffolding in an early literacy intervention. Reading Research Quarterly 51(2): 345–360.
3.
BaroneJKhairallahPGabrielR (2019) Running records revisited: A tool for efficiency and focus. The Reading Teacher 73(4): 525–530.
4.
BeanRMCassidyJGrumetJE, et al. (2002) What do reading specialists do? Results from a national survey. The Reading Teacher55(8): 736–744.
5.
BriceñoAKleinAF (2019) A second lens on formative reading assessment with multilingual students. The Reading Teacher72(5): 611–621.
6.
ClayMM (1966) Emergent reading behavior. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Auckland, Auckland, NZ.
7.
ClayMM (2000) Running Records for Classroom Teachers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
8.
ClayMM (2001) Change Over Time in Children's Literacy Development. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
9.
ClayMM (2013) An Observation Survey of Early Literacy Achievement. 3rd ed.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
10.
Clay MM (2016) Literacy Lessons Designed for Individuals. 2nd ed. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
11.
ClayMM (2019) An Observation Survey of Early Literacy Achievement. 4th ed. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
12.
DentonCACiancioDJFletcherJM (2006) Validity, reliability, and utility of the observation survey of early literacy achievement. Reading Research Quarterly41(1): 8–34.
13.
DoyleMA (2013) Marie M. Clay’s theoretical perspective: A literacy processing theory. In: AlvermannDEUnrauNJRuddellRB (eds) Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading. 6th ed.Newark, DE: International Reading Association, pp.636–655.
14.
FitzharrisLJonesMBCrawfordA (2008) Teacher knowledge matters in supporting young readers. The Reading Teacher61(5): 384–394.
15.
FriedMD (2013) Activating teaching: Using running records to inform teaching decisions. Journal of Reading Recovery13(1): 5–16.
16.
Goodman YM (2015) Miscue analysis: A transformative tool for researchers, teachers, and readers. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice 64(1): 92–111.
17.
HarmeySKabutoB (2018) Metatheoretical differences between running records and miscue analysis: Implications for analysis of oral reading behaviors. Research in the Teaching of English53(1): 11–33.
McCormickSZutellJ (2015) Instructing Students Who Have Literacy Problems. Columbus, OH: Pearson Higher Ed.
24.
PeregoySBoyleOF (2017) Reading, Writing, & Learning in ESL. New York: Longman.
25.
RaschG (1960) Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
26.
RossJA (2004) Effects of running records assessment on early literacy achievement. The Journal of Educational Research97(4): 186–195.
27.
StahlKADFlaniganKMcKennaMC (2020) Assessment for Reading Instruction. New York: Guilford.
28.
StanovichKE (1980) Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly16(1): 32–71.
29.
TempleCAOgleDCrawfordAN, et al. (2018) All Children Read: Teaching for Literacy in Today's Diverse Classrooms. Columbus, OH: Pearson.
30.
WangYCompton-LillyCSánchezL (2020) Formative reading assessments of running records and miscue analysis: Limits and possibilities for literacy learning. In: C. Martin, D. Polly, and R. Lambert (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Formative Assessment in Pre-K through Elementary Classrooms. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp.327–345.
