Reading Assessment and Instructional Practices in Special Education

Abstract

This study analyzed the instructional reading methods and reading assessment practices employed by K-12 special education teachers. Eight hundred special education teachers from four Midwestern states were surveyed regarding the frequency of use and usefulness of standardized and informal reading assessment practices and the frequency with which they used various reading instructional techniques. Responses were analyzed to determine percent of teachers employing each technique and the mean rating of usefulness assigned to each. Analysis included examination of the relationships between grade levels and instructional settings and teachers' preferences for reading instructional and assessment practices. The survey found that reading assessment practices present in the literature are not commonly used by special education teachers.

Further Progress Towards a Standardised Curriculum-based Measure of Reading: Calibrating a new passage reading test against the New South Wales Basic Skills Test

“…Although the WARP passages are not curriculum-based measures in the strong sense of CBM, they do sample the broader curricular domain of reading. As Arthaud, Vasa and Steckelberg (2000) put it, CBM uses "materials drawn from the students' curriculum, or materials of comparable dif culty that are similar to the curricular materials used in daily instruction" (p. 206-7).…”

Reading Assessment Strategies for Online Learners

“…As Denton (1999) reported, teachers can use test results of either formal or informal assessment to monitor a student's reading skills. The formal assessments include state-mandated standardized tests for monitoring reading progress, while the informal assessments include school-district or school-wide tests, curriculum-based tests, and teacher-strategic alternatives for ongoing performance assessment (Arthaud, Vasa & Steckelberg, 2000;Campbell, 2001;Denton, 1999;Rueda & Garcia, 1994. Curriculum-based reading tests include vocabulary tests, 'end of unit basal tests,' 'skills continua' and 'end of the book basal tests' to name a few (Arthaud, et al, 2000;Rueda & Garcia, 1994).…”

“…The formal assessments include state-mandated standardized tests for monitoring reading progress, while the informal assessments include school-district or school-wide tests, curriculum-based tests, and teacher-strategic alternatives for ongoing performance assessment (Arthaud, Vasa & Steckelberg, 2000;Campbell, 2001;Denton, 1999;Rueda & Garcia, 1994. Curriculum-based reading tests include vocabulary tests, 'end of unit basal tests,' 'skills continua' and 'end of the book basal tests' to name a few (Arthaud, et al, 2000;Rueda & Garcia, 1994). Teacher-strategic alternatives include, but are not limited to interviews with students, parents or previous teachers, ongoing observations, teacher-crafted questionnaires, text discussions, analyses of writing samples or journals, and monitoring of oral reading (Arthaud, et al, 2000;Rueda & Garcia, 1994.…”

“…Curriculum-based reading tests include vocabulary tests, 'end of unit basal tests,' 'skills continua' and 'end of the book basal tests' to name a few (Arthaud, et al, 2000;Rueda & Garcia, 1994). Teacher-strategic alternatives include, but are not limited to interviews with students, parents or previous teachers, ongoing observations, teacher-crafted questionnaires, text discussions, analyses of writing samples or journals, and monitoring of oral reading (Arthaud, et al, 2000;Rueda & Garcia, 1994.…”

How reliable are informal reading inventories?

“…Many special education assessment textbooks also identify IRIs as viable tools for evaluating reading skills in students who are referred for special education services or who receive special education services (McLoughlin & Lewis, 2005;Overton, 2003;Taylor, 2003). Indeed, a survey of special educators in four states revealed that special educators are just as likely to use IRIs as they are to use another widely recommended technique, curriculum-based measurement (CBM) of oral reading fluency (Arthaud, Vasa, & Steckelberg, 2000).…”