Features of Known and Unknown Words for First Graders of Different Proficiency Levels in Winter and Spring

Abstract

This study describes the features of words known and unknown by first graders of different proficiency levels in six instances of an oral reading fluency assessment: three in winter and three in spring. A sample of 411 students was placed into four groups (very high, high, middle, and low) based on their median correct words per minute in spring. Each word in the assessment was coded on 11 features: numbers of phonemes, letters, syllables, blends, morphemes, percentages of multisyllabic and of morphologically complex words, concreteness, age of acquisition, decodability, and U function. Words were classified as known if more than 50% of the students within a group were able to correctly read those words. Features of known and unknown words were contrasted for all but the highest group, which made no errors, at each point in time. An analysis of the patterns of known words across groups from winter to spring shows that students followed a similar general progression in the number and type of words recognized. The most prominent feature of unknown words in winter and spring for the middle group of students was the presence of multiple syllables. The lowest-performing group of students continued to be limited by word length and frequency in their recognition of words, but on both features, their proficiency increased from winter to spring. The discussion addresses several critical issues, most notably the relationship of words in oral reading assessments to the word recognition curriculum of many beginning reading programs.

The Word Complexity of Primary‐Level Texts: Differences Between First and Third Grade in Widely Used Curricula

“…A recent analysis (Hiebert et al, 2020) described students’ performances on assessment texts with word features similar to those in current first‐grade texts. In that study, students in the bottom quartile read with 84% accuracy on one‐minute curriculum‐based‐measurement texts.…”

“…An analytic scheme based on single features, such as frequency, or on decodable complexity will not capture the underlying skills required to read the typical words in beginning texts. For example, none of the previous studies has described the word recognition demands that are evident in a widely used first‐grade assessment where approximately 17.5% of the unique words are multisyllabic (e.g., different , busy ) and 18.2% morphologically complex (e.g., showed , beginning ; Hiebert, Toyama, & Irey, 2020).…”

When Students Perform at the Below Basic Level on the NAEP: What Does It Mean and What Can Educators Do?

“…It is multisyllabic words, however, that pose the greatest challenge for students who are at the beginning stages of reading and those who are performing below expected levels. Most of the words that are unknown by children in the bottom half of a first‐grade distribution are multisyllabic (Hiebert et al, 2020). Multisyllabic words continue to challenge students designated as below expected levels in middle grades through high school.…”

Thinking through research and the science of reading

“…During this time, I have read numerous research articles and books; listened to podcasts, webinars, and conference presentations; and interacted with colleagues with a range of perspectives. I also have explored several new, challenging, and previously unfamiliar lines of research in my own writing (Hiebert, Toyoma, & Irey, 2020).…”