1 / 14

Examining Differential Boost from Read Aloud on a Test of Reading Comprehension at Grades 4 and 8

Examining Differential Boost from Read Aloud on a Test of Reading Comprehension at Grades 4 and 8. Cara Cahalan-Laitusis Linda Cook Fred Cline Teresa King. Accommodation vs. Modification. States are not in agreement on read aloud on reading tests

jermaine-cherry
Download Presentation

Examining Differential Boost from Read Aloud on a Test of Reading Comprehension at Grades 4 and 8

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Examining Differential Boost from Read Aloud on a Test of Reading Comprehension at Grades 4 and 8 Cara Cahalan-Laitusis Linda Cook Fred Cline Teresa King

  2. Accommodation vs. Modification • States are not in agreement on read aloud on reading tests • Many students use read aloud even when “not allowed” by the state • In California nearly 4,000 fourth graders took the STAR English Language Arts assessment in 2004 with the test read aloud • Schools are torn between complying with state policy to not allow read aloud and federal regulations to allow all accommodations used in the classroom

  3. Differential Boost

  4. Prior Research • No Differential Boost • Kosciokek & Ysseldyke (2000). Small sample size (n=31) • Meloy, Deville, and Frisbie (2002) – Between subjects design (n=260, 76% non-disabled, random assigned to audio or standard) • McKevitt & Elliott (2003) Small sample size (n=39) • Differential Boost • Crawford and Tindal (2004) (n=338, 78% non-disabled) • Fletcher, et. al (2006) Between subjects design (random assigned to audio or standard) and sample included 91 Dyslexic (poor decoder) and 91 average decoders

  5. Differential Boost Design

  6. Data Collected • 2 Reading Comprehension Tests • Extra Time • Extra Time with Read Aloud via CD • 2 Fluency Measures • 2 Decoding Measures (4th grade only) • Student Survey • Teacher Survey

  7. Sample • 1170 4th Graders • 522 Students with RLD • 648 Students without a disability • 855 8th Graders • 394 Students with RLD • 461 Students without a disability

  8. Mean Scale Score and Boost

  9. Teacher Prediction

  10. Student Prediction

  11. Preliminary Findings • Differential Boost at both 4th and 8th grades (i.e., students with LD had significantly greater score gains from read aloud than non-LD students) • Differential Boost (at both grades) even after controlling for Reading Fluency

  12. Additional Analyses Planned • Examine if controlling for decoding and fluency result in differential boost • Differential Item Functioning between groups • Examine which variables (decoding, fluency, teacher ratings, student ratings) best predict boost from audio

  13. Additional Analyses Planned • Predictive Validity of test scores • Compute regression equation for non-RLD standard score to other measure of RC (e.g., teacher ratings, state test scores, and/or fluency measure • Examine over/under estimations of non-LD audio, RLD audio, and RLD standard

More Related