Oral Reading Fluency Norms: A Valuable Assessment Tool for Reading Teachers

Abstract

In 1992, the authors collaborated to develop a set of norms for oral reading fluency for grades 2–5. Since then, interest in and awareness of fluency has greatly increased, and Hasbrouck and Tindal have collaborated further to compile an updated and expanded set of norms for grades 1–8. This article discusses the application of these norms to three important assessment activities related to improving students' reading achievement: Screening students for possible reading problems Diagnosing deficits in students' fluency Monitoring the progress of students receiving supplementary instruction or intensive intervention in reading An overview of the history and purpose for developing measures of oral reading fluency is also presented.

Efficient Learning for the Poor: Insights from the Frontier of Cognitive Neuroscience

“…Barr et al 2002, p. 76. New speed norms for English (Hasbrouck and Tindal 2006) show the 50th percentile as 53 words per minute (spring of grade 1) and 89 words per minute 25. Laberge and Samuels in 1974 found that speed was a prerequisite for comprehension.…”

Answering questions after initial study guides attention during restudy

“…The total reading time was thus 8 minutes (480,000 milliseconds) per study phase. Reading fluency scores (Hasbrouck & Tindal, 2006) showed that this should be sufficient time for the students to carefully read each paragraph (i.e., 133 words per minute in grade 8). During the initial reading phases, the computer automatically went to the subsequent paragraph, whereas during the final reading phase (the final phase in both conditions), students were presented the complete text and could scroll through it as they liked.…”

The Early Grade Reading Assessment: Applications and Interventions to Improve Basic Literacy

“…Oral reading fluency is a measure of overall reading competence: the ability to translate letters into sounds, unify sounds into words, process connections, relate text to meaning, and make inferences to fill in missing information (Hasbrouck & Tindal, 2006). As skilled readers translate text into spoken language, they combine these tasks in a seemingly effortless manner (automaticity); because oral reading fluency captures this complex process, it can be used to characterize overall reading skill.…”

“…(continued) , 1999;Hasbrouck & Tindal, 2006;Kame' enui et al, 2006;Kaminski et al, 2006). In many of these applications, relevant EGRA subtasks are complemented by a short series of contextual questions that help analysts break down results by groups of interest, such as socioeconomic status, parents' education or reading ability, language used in the home, reading materials found in the home, or other factors.…”

“…No holistic scoring or rubrics are employed. Norms exist for students in the United States (Hasbrouck & Tindal, 2006), but have not been established in many other countries. In 2009, RTI International introduced a toolkit (RTI International, 2009), based on various field experiences, to provide practical guidance for designing reading CBMs in countries that are beginning to develop assessment tools for awareness and policy dialogue.…”