Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Twice Exceptional Reading aloud fluency issue

Thanks! This helps explain it.

Thanks all. I actually went in and chatted with his teachers today and they seemed like I was worried over nothing and all is fine. They said he got 94% on fluency and he needed a 99% but his fluency isn't "bad" per se and all other aspect of test were great - he did very well. The only thing is the IRLA test does not test silent reading comprehension like the DRA, so that is not good for him. She is going to test his silent reading comprehension with another test next week and make plans for him accordingly... and they said he could still read above level work.

I don't know what to think... they said it wasn't a big deal and they they would work on it with him at school and his teacher even said she was happy to have something to work on with him. I guess it's not a big deal after all? My son is very hung up on his "level" he feels like he needs to always be top and top of his class so that is more of the problem - he gets upset at the mere hint that he is not achieving his maximum.

So I found some info on IRLA. The big difference between IRLA and most of the other systems is that it is designed around the Common Core grade level expectations, which are qualitatively different from grade to grade, so although it has continuous scores, they are not really based on the same assessed skills from grade to grade. It also has very high mastery criteria (99% in every aspect of reading) for advancement to the next level. The routing test for determining the level to use for assessment is supposed to be vocabulary knowledge.

"The student’s baseline reading level is the highest level passage s/he is able to read comfortably, with 99-100% word recognition, expression and fluency, while answering basic comprehension (Common Core State Standard 1) and vocabulary questions (Common Core State Standard 4) appropriate to the level."

Following is a link to a technical document discussing some of the psychometric strengths and weaknesses of IRLA as a reading assessment, and quite a bit about end-user feedback. One item that jumps out at me is it has no data on standard error of measurement.

http://www.americanreading.com/documents/report-measurement-inc.pdf

So wait ... The part of the assessment that determines whether or not he moves to the next level is the vocabulary ? Is that tmthe case? He's like 2 levels above in that ... But yes I believe his fluency score was only 94% ... So should they really not be allowing to move to the next level, then? Thanks AEH!

The part of the assessment that determines where they start the rest of the assessment is vocabulary. From there, he has to reach 99% in all of the other areas (word recognition, expression and fluency, comprehension) as well to move on. Still a bit of a hindrance to slow but accurate readers, in many cases, but, if the routing test is properly administered, he still shouldn't be placed many grade levels below his actual reading ability. The routing test is based on the text leveling system. If he can read and define at least 5 or 6 words from the list of routing vocabulary words for that level, then he should be administered the other tests for that level.

The problem probably comes when assessors stop before administering the level -above- the appropriate level, so they don't know what the actual highest level of vocabulary he would have passed is. The instructions should really say to administer vocabulary levels until the student passes -fewer- than five words, and then continue testing at the level below that. If he parked there, working on oral reading fluency, it wouldn't be so bad.

So let's say, he passed purple level vocab but then only got 95% on the fluency .... Does he stay on purple, then? That's what happened . But What teacher is doing is using the lower fluency score to move him down from purple to the level below, which is orange. It sounds like he should really stay at purple, no? It would explain why they started backpedalling today when I started seeking to look more deeply into how the test is conducted and where he was deficient.-

So I spent some more time poking around for info on IRLA, and found that the fluency measure is supposed to be scored only on word reading accuracy, not on objectively measured rate. Rate is subjective: "appropriate rate and expression". And passing to the next level (color) is based almost entirely on the other measures of vocabulary, comprehension, and range of reading.

This is the progression:

Determine entry level for initial test: out of a list of 15 vocabulary words, correctly read and define at least 5. If 12 or more are correct, proceed to the next level of vocabulary words, and continue testing vocabulary until at least 5 but no more than 11 are correct. This is the level for the initial cold read assessment text.

Initial cold read qualifier: read text aloud with 99-100% accuracy, and "appropriate" rate and expression. If accuracy is below 99%, drop down a level for cold read, until accuracy rises to 99%. Conduct comprehension assessment at that level.

Comprehension assessment: if student obtains 9/12 comprehension points at this level, then this is their reading level.

Now where things get interesting is, as I mentioned above, once you've determined an entry point, the oral reading fluency measure is no longer important. (It literally constitutes 1% of the points required. Also, accuracy for exiting is 98%, rather than the 99% for initial placement.) All the remaining criteria for advancing up through the levels are based on vocabulary, comprehension, and range of reading. So it is hypothetically possible for, say, a careless reader with high comprehension to be placed a few grade levels below their actual level by the initial cold read, but then to progress rather rapidly up the levels by passing all the comprehension benchmarks.

I would say that, if one suspects a child is misplaced for fluency reasons, one should request that the comprehension assessments for exiting the level be administered, rather than re-assessing with the placement test. That should make it rather obvious that there is only a very tiny, and not very significant, reason for considering keeping them at that level. I suspect that is why, in your situation, they started backpedaling. Even though he may or may not meet the cold read qualifier for purple, he probably meets all the orange-to-purple transition criteria.

You could also suggest to your DS to slow down very slightly while reading aloud, which may increase his accuracy (if that was the issue) to above 99%. As long as he is still reading at what sounds like a natural pace, and not struggling to decode words (a few immediate, fluent self-corrections are allowed) he should get credit for appropriate rate and expression.

Thank you so much, aeh! This is great, now I know what questions to ask and what is going i.e., how test is structured.

It sounds so complicated and time intensive....our schools just use STAR reading and STaR math tests on the computer and call it a day.

I agree Cookie but it is the common core - that stuff seems very complicated and time consuming, etc.


Aeh,
I got a little suspicious when I spoke to the teachers. I felt like one (the reading one) was doing a lot of justifying and "talking around" my questions. Also, they told my DS something completely opposite than what they told me and that is why I went to meet with them because they had upset him so much. Mind you, he is easily upset over this stuff and is very fixated on progressing and "passing tests" - he sees this reading level move/issue as a "failure." I myself really don't see that big of deal at this point as long as he likes what he is reading, is challenged, etc. He, however, is really anxious and upset over this perceived failure and is very intent on finding out where he is "deficient" and working on it. So, I promised I would find out for him. When he tries to they start counseling that he needs to be okay with failing sometimes and not always being on top and either do not explain the test/system/structure or they lie. Anyway, in terms of them telling DS something completely opposite than what they told me - teacher told him his true level was now down a level. Then at independent reading time, the teacher assistant helped his find an interesting book (he had just finished the one he had been reading) and she suggested the purple level book and he started reading. Apparently, reading teacher came over chastised him for taking a book from a level he is no longer on, chastised the assistant, and made a pretty big ddeal about it. When I talked the teachers(and I did not tell them I heard all about this incident) they told me the opposite, they said "oh he can still read purple level books; in fact, assistant just suggested this book (they showed it to me) and that is what he is going to read at independent reading time!" And I really requested very direct and specific information (like you just gave me ... even something close to that would have been nice). I wanted to know how the test is structured, what my DS needed to pass, and where exactly he did not pass, by how much, etc. But there was a lot of talking around and 'justifying', talk of going "deep" (apparently that is really the buzz word with these new curriculums - I hear it in math too... so weird. I am not sure why it feels like they do not want to give certain information... and why it is so important to almost find reasons to keep a child from moving levels... I do believe or like to believe the teachers have good intentions... I can't imagine these ones, in particular, have some other agenda or some reason for keeping my DS down. BUT it just feels odd that I can't get specific information, that there is backpedaling, that when it comes down to it there is not a really, truly valid reason for this. It's just odd. Unless they really believe he needs something or is moving when he really is deficient but, yet, they said that was not the case. I am so confused. I find it very odd. Add to that teacher did made a comment that she wanted something to work on with him...