Predicting performance on a 3rd grade high-stakes reading assessment

Smith, Kristin Conradi; Amendum, Steven J.; Jang, Bong Gee

doi:10.1080/10573569.2019.1649612

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, literacy benchmark goals for students in kindergarten through sixth grade have been generated for DIBELS Next to guide teachers in making decisions based on the level of achievement students should attain at specific points in time during the school year (Cummings et al, 2011). Finally, there is evidence of the predictive validity of DIBELS Next to a state reading assessment (Conradi Smith et al, 2020).…”

Section: Assessing Literacy Skillsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Classification Accuracy of Early Literacy Assessments: Linking Preschool and Kindergarten Performance

Koller

Hojnoski

Norman

2022

Assessment for Effective Intervention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A strong foundation in early literacy supports children’s academic pursuits and impacts personal, social, and economic outcomes. Therefore, examining the adequacy of early literacy assessments as predictors of future performance on important outcomes is critical for identifying students at risk of reading problems. This study explored the predictive validity of preschoolers’ literacy skills measured in the spring, with the Individual Growth and Development Indicators 2.0 (IGDIs 2.0) to performance in the fall and winter of kindergarten as assessed by the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills Next Edition (DIBELS Next) using Pearson product-moment correlations. In addition, the classification accuracy of student performance on the IGDIs 2.0 measures to the publisher-identified benchmark scores on DIBELS Next assessment in kindergarten was examined by calculating the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive power, overall correct classification, and kappa. Participants included 537 children from ethnically diverse backgrounds enrolled in an urban school district in the northeast. Results indicated small to moderate relations between the individual IGDIs 2.0 tasks and DIBELS Next measures. Classification accuracy of student performance on the IGDIs 2.0 measures to the publisher-identified benchmark score on DIBELS Next composite in the fall and winter of kindergarten revealed inadequate levels of sensitivity; however, locally-derived cut-scores improved sensitivity and specificity.

show abstract

Section: Assessing Literacy Skillsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Classification Accuracy of Early Literacy Assessments: Linking Preschool and Kindergarten Performance

Koller

Hojnoski

Norman

2022

Assessment for Effective Intervention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Accountability-driven school reform: are there unintended effects on younger children in untested grades?

Henry

McNeill

Harbatkin³

2022

Early Childhood Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Utility of the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills as a Literacy Screener for Children Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing

Burke,

Cooper,

Werfel

2023

Perspect ASHA SIGs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to (a) compare outcomes between children who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) and children with typical hearing (CTH) on the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS), Eighth Edition assessment and (b) compare outcomes of children who are DHH on the DIBELS to other standardized literacy assessments. Method: Participants included 19 children who are DHH and 19 CTH in kindergarten or first grade. All participants who are DHH had bilateral hearing loss and used listening technology. The participants completed timed and untimed standardized literacy assessments. Data were analyzed using independent-samples t test, chi-square analysis, and Pearson correlation analysis. Results: Only one of five subtests on the DIBELS, the Oral Reading Fluency subtest, revealed a significant difference in scores between children who are DHH and CTH. Despite this difference, there were no differences in the distribution of risk between the groups. The DIBELS scores of children who are DHH strongly correlated to their scores on other standardized literacy assessments. Conclusions: The results indicate that the DIBELS is an adequate measure to screen early literacy skills for children who are DHH. The DHH and CTH groups differ in reading comprehension using a standardized measure; however, the DIBELS does not measure this skill. Further assessments of reading comprehension along with the DIBELS are recommended when assessing these skills in children who are DHH.

show abstract

Predicting performance on a 3rd grade high-stakes reading assessment

Cited by 6 publications

References 56 publications

Classification Accuracy of Early Literacy Assessments: Linking Preschool and Kindergarten Performance

Classification Accuracy of Early Literacy Assessments: Linking Preschool and Kindergarten Performance

Accountability-driven school reform: are there unintended effects on younger children in untested grades?

The Utility of the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills as a Literacy Screener for Children Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About