Comparing the Cost–Accuracy Ratios of Multiple Approaches to Reading Screening in Elementary Schools
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21561222 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Courtenay A Barrett (0000-0001-9258-4725, Michigan State University, East Lansing, USA, corresponding author), Lindy J Johnson (0000-0002-2769-4642, Michigan State University, East Lansing, USA), Adrea J Truckenmiller (0000-0002-6101-6175, Michigan State University, East Lansing, USA), Amanda M Vanderheyden (Education Research and Consulting, Fairhope, AL, USA) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 45 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 71-84 |
| Publication date | 2024-04-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Remedial and Special Education (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0741-9325 • E-ISSN: 1538-4756 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/07419325231190809 |
| OpenAlex | W4386195549 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 25 |
U.S. elementary schools administer reading screeners to identify students in need of remedial instruction. However, the administration of additional assessments comes with a cost. It is unclear the extent to which multiple types of reading screeners warrant the increase in resources that could be used for instruction. This study compared cost–accuracy ratios for three types of reading screeners in Grade 3: curriculum-based measurement (Acadience), computer adaptive assessment (Star), informal reading inventory (Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System), and the cost–accuracy of using all three in conjunction. We used classification and regression tree analysis to identify local cut-scores and identify how measures could be combined to maximize classification accuracy. Results suggested that oral reading fluency score (Acadience) yielded the best cost–accuracy ratio, but the combination of Star and oral reading fluency identified important instructional groups. Cost tables provide additional insight to schools on critical decision points for choosing and implementing reading screeners
Linguistics · Mathematics education · Pedagogy · Primary education · Behavioral and Psychological Studies · Computer Science · Educational Assessment and Improvement · Psychology · Reading and Literacy Development
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 3 |
| Citation span | 2025 - 2025 (1) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |