Examining readability estimates' predictions of students' oral reading rate: Spache, lexile, and forcast

Scott P. Ardoin, Jessica C. Williams, Theodore J. Christ, Cynthia Klubnik, Claire Wellborn

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

21 Scopus citations

Abstract

Beyond reliability and validity, measures used to model student growth must consist of multiple probes that are equivalent in level of difficulty to establish consistent measurement conditions across time. Although existing evidence supports the reliability of curriculum-based measurement in reading (CBMR), few studies have empirically evaluated the appropriateness of the methods employed to determine the difficulty of CBM-R passages. The current study extends existing research with an evaluation of the relationship of oral reading performance and readability estimates on 50 CBM-R alternate forms. A sample of 88 second- and third-grade students read all 50 forms. Spache, Lexile, and Forcast readability estimates were used to estimate the difficulty of alternate forms. Results replicate and extend previous research to suggest that readability estimates are inadequate predictors of oral reading performance and therefore evaluation of CBM-R passage difficulty.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)277-285
Number of pages9
JournalSchool Psychology Review
Volume39
Issue number2
StatePublished - Jun 1 2010

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Examining readability estimates' predictions of students' oral reading rate: Spache, lexile, and forcast'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this