Reliability and Validity of Curriculum-Based Informal Reading Inventories

Dados Bibliográficos

ID10722425
AutoresLynn S Fuchs (0000-0003-2099-5247), Douglas Fuchs (0000-0002-5094-1023), Stanley L Deno
Ano1982
Volume18
Fascículo1
Páginas6
Data de publicação1982-01-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessNão
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoReading Research Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0034-0553 • E-ISSN: 1936-2722
EditoraJSTOR (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.2307/747536
OpenAlexW1985392762
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas7
Referências citadas3

INFORMAL READING INVENTORIES (IRIs) are endorsed frequently by textbook authors and teacher trainers. However, the reliability and validity of standard and salient IRI procedures rarely have been investigated. Employing 91 elementary-age students, this study examined the technical adequacy of (a) choosing a criterion of 95% accuracy for word recognition to determine an instructional level, (b) arbitrarily selecting a passage to represent the difficulty level of a basal reader, and (c) employing one-level floors and ceilings to demarcate levels beyond which behavior is not sampled. Correlational and congruency analyses supported the external validity of the 95% standard but questioned the reliability and validity of passage sampling procedures and one-level floors and ceilings. Sampling over occasions and test forms is discussed as a more valid IRI procedure

Curriculum · Curriculum development · Curriculum mapping · Curriculum-based measurement · Developmental psychology · Linguistics · Mathematics education · Pedagogy · Psychometrics · Reading (process) · Reading comprehension · Reliability (semiconductor) · Test validity · Validity · Computer Science · Digital Accessibility for Disabilities · Psychology · Reading and Literacy Development · Text Readability and Simplification