Credibly assessing reading and writing abilities for both elementary student and program assessment |
| |
| Authors: | John Burgin Gail D Hughes |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Universidad de Navarra, Departamento de Educación, Pamplona, Spain;2. SUNY Fredonia, Fredonia, NY, USA;1. College of Mathematical Science, Shandong Normal University, Jinan 250014, China;2. Department of Mathematics and Physics, Shandong Jiaotong University, Jinan 250023, China;1. Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics, 11, akademika Lavrentieva prospect, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia;2. Novosibirsk State University, 2, Pirogova street, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia;3. Novosibirsk State Technical University, 20, Karl Marx prospect, Novosibirsk, 630092, Russia;1. State Key Laboratory of Functional Materials for Informatics, Shanghai Institute of Micro-system and Information Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 200050 Shanghai, People’s Republic of China;2. Graduate School of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, 100080 Beijing, People’s Republic of China;1. School of Mathematics and Statistics, Minnan Normal University, Zhangzhou 363000, PR China;2. Institute of Mathematics, Ningde Teachers'' College, Ningde, Fujian 352100, PR China;3. Department of Mathematics, Ohio University Zanesville Campus, Zanesville, OH 43701, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | The authors explored the credibility of using informal reading inventories and writing samples for 138 students (K–4) to evaluate the effectiveness of a summer literacy program. Running Records (a measure of a child's reading level) and teacher experience during daily reading instruction were used to estimate the reliability of the more formal Developmental Reading Assessment scores. Training of scorers was used to increase the reliability of writing scores; a second scoring was used to estimate the reliability of the scores. The results suggested that with minimal modifications to administration and scoring procedures, scores from both reading inventories and writing samples can be a dependable source of data for teachers, administrators, and policy makers. This result is significant because it suggests that formative literacy assessments can be reliably used instead of standardized multiple-choice tests to make more credible summative decisions without taking time away from instruction, and can truly match curriculum, instruction, and assessment. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
