In search of average growth: Describing within-year oral reading fluency growth across Grades 1–8

Nese, Joseph F. T.; Biancarosa, Gina; Cummings, Kelli D.; Kennedy, Patrick C.; Alonzo, Julie; Tindal, Gerald

doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2013.05.006

Cited by 65 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The nonlinear growth pattern is supported by previous research of ORF growth in English for students in the later grades (e.g., S.K. Baker et al, 2008;Fuchs et al, 1993;Nese et al, 2013). Furthermore, it is consistent with theory and research regarding the development of automaticity in reading (LaBerge & Samuels, 1974).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…This nonlinear pattern of rapid early growth and later slower growth has been replicated in other studies (S.K. Baker et al., ; Nese et al., ; Stage & Jacobsen, ). Speece and Ritchey () showed that students with high rates of growth on ORF in grade 1 were more likely to maintain strong growth rates in grade 2 and read at grade level at the end of grade 2 than students who had low rates of growth.…”

Section: Orf As a Measure Of Reading Growth Across Timesupporting

confidence: 73%

“…As students become more proficient in reading, individual differences seem to deal more with reading comprehension of the particular passage than with reading comprehension in general (e.g., García & Cain, 2014;Pikulski & Chard, 2005;Stanovich, 2000). This does not necessarily mean that administering the ORF measure in grade 5 is not useful but that expectations for linear growth might be unrealistic in practice (Nese et al, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Growth in Oral Reading Fluency in a Semitransparent Orthography: Concurrent and Predictive Relations With Reading Proficiency in Norwegian, Grades 2–5

Arnesen

Braeken

Baker

et al. 2016

Reading Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TThis study investigated an adaptation of the Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) measure of the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills into a European context for the Norwegian language, which has a more transparent orthography than English. Second-order latent growth curve modeling was used to examine the longitudinal measurement invariance of the ORF measure, the growth in oral reading fluency within and across grades 2-5, the relative stability of the ORF measure, and the relationship between the ORF measure and high-stakes national tests of reading proficiency. Results showed that the ORF passages measured the same underlying construct, but some passages stood out regarding the invariance pattern. The oral reading fluency growth curve models demonstrated a linear growth in grades 2 and 3 and a nonlinear growth in grades 4 and 5. Initial individual differences varied more than growth rates, which for all were positive but largest in grades 3 and 4. High relative stability in the ORF measure was found across grades. The concurrent and predictive relations of the ORF measure on the Norwegian national reading tests were moderate to strong (range = .44-.75). Findings indicated that the ORF is a reliable and valid measure of reading in Norwegian grades 2-5 and easy and fast to administer. The ORF measure might contribute to early identification of students at risk for reading difficulties in an orthography more transparent than English. Implications for school practice and future research are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Orf As a Measure Of Reading Growth Across Timesupporting

confidence: 73%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Growth in Oral Reading Fluency in a Semitransparent Orthography: Concurrent and Predictive Relations With Reading Proficiency in Norwegian, Grades 2–5

Arnesen

Braeken

Baker

et al. 2016

Reading Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, in a study using multiple easyCBM passages administered during the year to students in Grades 1 to 8, Nese et al (2013) modeled growth over eight occasions (monthly) throughout the year. The best fitting model expressed time in varying individually coded weeks (rather than fixed weeks or months) using a nonlinear growth model (quadratic, decelerating).…”

Section: Orf Growth When Measured More Frequently Than Benchmarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Growth on Oral Reading Fluency Measures as a Function of Special Education and Measurement Sufficiency

Tindal

Nese

Stevens

et al. 2015

Remedial and Special Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oral reading fluency (ORF) was investigated initially by Deno, Mirkin, and Chiang (1982) with a plethora of studies published since then (Tindal, 2013). As originally designed, ORF was to provide teachers a systematic way to monitor the effects of instruction over time. In the early days, passages were drawn at random from a curriculum series representing a "long range goal" level of difficulty (to be covered within the year) that inherently provided preview and review of material (Fuchs & Deno, 1994). Although the early applications of ORF were oriented to monitoring progress for students with disabilities, it quickly spread to establishing "benchmarks" or norms at various times (seasons) in Grades 1 to 8, beginning with Tindal, Germann, and Deno (1983). Typically, change over time has been reported as words correct per minute (wcpm), using either school days (5) or calendar days (7) to create a weekly metric.Concurrent with the research on ORF, its use in applied settings is becoming nearly ubiquitous with response to intervention (RTI) systems. In part, this is likely due to the emphasis with most RTI approaches on collecting learning data over time to evaluate instruction using some kind decision-making process (Batsche et al., 2005). Typically, RTI includes high-quality, differentiated instruction organized into tiers (levels of intensity) as well as universal screening and progress monitoring to support the decision-making process (Liu, Alonzo, & Tindal, 2011). As a measurement system, ORF appears both technically adequate in its relation to other important indicators (e.g., statewide tests) and is sensitive to change within the year. Shapiro, Zigmond, Wallace, and Marston (2011) noted that, in RTI, "progress monitoring plays such a key role, underlying many of the decisions made through the model" (p. xiv).We position this research in an applied setting where ORF is being used by hundreds of teachers to monitor their students' progress in Tier 2 settings (having been found to be significantly below peers on fall benchmark measures). An important study for our research is that of Mellard, McKnight, and Woods (2009) who concluded that schools were screening students in various ways, using norms or percentage of population as cut points for risk assessment, placing students into instructional tiers (in varying proportions), and monitoring progress in Tiers 2 and 3. Through their in-depth interviews, they noted that "first, the importance of good record keeping systems was a recurring theme" (p. 192). For us, good record keeping includes sufficient progress monitoring to inform the decision-making process.

show abstract

“…empirically-validating academic interventions, including reading, vocabulary, spelling, writing, and math ( (Blaze, Olmi, Mercer, Dufrene, & Tingstom, 2014;Briesch, Chafouleas, Neugebauer, & Riley-Tillman, 2013;Chafouleas et al, 2013;Folino, Ducharme, & Greenwald, 2014;Fosco, Frank, Stormshank, & Dishion, 2013;Imeraj et al, 2013); c. advancing the science of curriculum-based measurement (Ardoin et al, 2013;Christ, Zopluoglu, Monaghen, & Van Norman, 2013;Cummings, Biancarosa, Schaper, & Reed, 2014;Kettler & Albers, 2013;Nese et al, 2013;Shapiro, 2013); d. investigating the importance of teacher-student relationships (Chan et al, 2013 I encourage authors to continue submitting work that falls in these broad categories of school psychology where JSP is actively contributing. I also want to promote future research in the areas identified by leaders in the field of school psychology.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The state of the Journal of School Psychology: Promoting science

Demaray

2015

Journal of School Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In search of average growth: Describing within-year oral reading fluency growth across Grades 1–8

Cited by 65 publications

References 61 publications

Growth in Oral Reading Fluency in a Semitransparent Orthography: Concurrent and Predictive Relations With Reading Proficiency in Norwegian, Grades 2–5

Growth in Oral Reading Fluency in a Semitransparent Orthography: Concurrent and Predictive Relations With Reading Proficiency in Norwegian, Grades 2–5

Growth on Oral Reading Fluency Measures as a Function of Special Education and Measurement Sufficiency

The state of the Journal of School Psychology: Promoting science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About