• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

在寻找平均增长:描述 1 年级至 8 年级年内口语阅读流利度的增长情况。

In search of average growth: describing within-year oral reading fluency growth across Grades 1-8.

机构信息

University of Oregon, USA.

出版信息

J Sch Psychol. 2013 Oct;51(5):625-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2013.05.006. Epub 2013 Jun 5.

DOI:10.1016/j.jsp.2013.05.006
PMID:24060064
Abstract

Measures of oral reading fluency (ORF) are perhaps the most often used assessment to monitor student progress as part of a response to intervention (RTI) model. Rates of growth in research and aim lines in practice are used to characterize student growth; in either case, growth is generally defined as linear, increasing at a constant rate. Recent research suggests ORF growth follows a nonlinear trajectory, but limitations related to the datasets used in such studies, composed of only three testing occasions, curtails their ability to examine the true functional form of ORF growth. The purpose of this study was to model within-year ORF growth using up to eight testing occasions for 1448 students in Grades 1 to 8 to assess (a) the average growth trajectory for within-year ORF growth, (b) whether students vary significantly in within-year ORF growth, and (c) the extent to which findings are consistent across grades. Results demonstrated that for Grades 1 to 7, a quadratic growth model fit better than either linear or cubic growth models, and for Grade 8, there was no substantial, stable growth. Findings suggest that the expectation for linear growth currently used in practice may be unrealistic.

摘要

口语流畅度(ORF)的衡量标准也许是最常用来监测学生进步的评估方法,是反应干预(RTI)模式的一部分。研究和实践中的目标线的增长率被用来描述学生的成长;在这两种情况下,成长通常被定义为线性的,以恒定的速度增加。最近的研究表明,ORF 的增长遵循非线性轨迹,但与这些研究中使用的数据集相关的限制,这些数据集只包含三个测试场合,限制了它们检查 ORF 增长真实功能形式的能力。本研究的目的是使用 1448 名 1 至 8 年级学生多达 8 次的测试机会来建立年度内 ORF 增长模型,以评估:(a)年度内 ORF 增长的平均增长轨迹;(b)学生在年度内 ORF 增长方面是否存在显著差异;(c)这些发现在各年级之间的一致性程度。结果表明,对于 1 至 7 年级,二次增长模型比线性或三次增长模型更适合,而对于 8 年级,没有实质性的、稳定的增长。研究结果表明,目前在实践中使用的线性增长的期望可能不切实际。

相似文献

1
In search of average growth: describing within-year oral reading fluency growth across Grades 1-8.在寻找平均增长:描述 1 年级至 8 年级年内口语阅读流利度的增长情况。
J Sch Psychol. 2013 Oct;51(5):625-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2013.05.006. Epub 2013 Jun 5.
2
Examining Predictive Validity of Oral Reading Fluency Slope in Upper Elementary Grades Using Quantile Regression.使用分位数回归检验小学高年级口语阅读流利度斜率的预测效度。
J Learn Disabil. 2018 Nov/Dec;51(6):565-577. doi: 10.1177/0022219417719887. Epub 2017 Jul 30.
3
Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading: multi-study evaluation of schedule, duration, and dataset quality on progress monitoring outcomes.基于课程的口语阅读测量:进度监测结果对日程安排、持续时间和数据集质量的多研究评估。
J Sch Psychol. 2013 Feb;51(1):19-57. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2012.11.001. Epub 2012 Dec 14.
4
Simultaneous measurement of reading growth, gender, and relative-age effects: many-faceted Rasch applied to CBM reading scores.同时测量阅读能力增长、性别和相对年龄效应:多面Rasch模型应用于CBM阅读分数
J Appl Meas. 2000;1(4):393-408.
5
Incremental and predictive utility of formative assessment methods of reading comprehension.阅读理解形成性评估方法的增量效用和预测效用
J Sch Psychol. 2009 Oct;47(5):315-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2009.04.003. Epub 2009 May 30.
6
Monitoring early first-grade reading progress: a comparison of two measures.监测一年级早期阅读进展:两种测量方法的比较
J Learn Disabil. 2014 May-Jun;47(3):254-70. doi: 10.1177/0022219412454455. Epub 2012 Aug 30.
7
The utility and accuracy of oral reading fluency score types in predicting reading comprehension.朗读流畅性评分类型在预测阅读理解中的效用和准确性。
J Sch Psychol. 2011 Feb;49(1):107-29. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2010.09.004. Epub 2010 Oct 20.
8
Accuracy of the DIBELS oral reading fluency measure for predicting third grade reading comprehension outcomes.用于预测三年级阅读理解结果的动态指标基础早期读写技能(DIBELS)口语阅读流畅性测量的准确性。
J Sch Psychol. 2008 Jun;46(3):343-66. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2007.06.006. Epub 2007 Jul 19.
9
Examiner error in curriculum-based measurement of oral reading.基于课程的口语阅读测量中的考官误差。
J Sch Psychol. 2014 Aug;52(4):361-75. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2014.05.007. Epub 2014 Jun 25.
10
Statistical equating with measures of oral reading fluency.统计等同与口语阅读流利度的衡量。
J Sch Psychol. 2012 Feb;50(1):43-59. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2011.07.002. Epub 2011 Aug 17.

引用本文的文献

1
Software for assessment and monitoring the decoding skills development of children from the elementary school: validity based on response process.小学儿童解码技能发展评估与监测软件:基于反应过程的有效性。
Codas. 2024 Sep 13;36(5):e20230349. doi: 10.1590/2317-1782/20242023349pt. eCollection 2024.
2
Graph Out Loud: Pre-Service Teachers' Data Decisions and Interpretations of CBM Progress Graphs.大声解读图表:职前教师对课程本位测量进展图表的数据决策与解读
J Learn Disabil. 2025 Jan-Feb;58(1):33-45. doi: 10.1177/00222194241231768. Epub 2024 Feb 27.
3
Equating Oral Reading Fluency Scores: A Model-Based Approach.
等同口语阅读流利度分数:一种基于模型的方法。
Educ Psychol Meas. 2024 Feb;84(1):190-209. doi: 10.1177/00131644221148122. Epub 2023 Jan 5.
4
Reading, linguistic, and metacognitive skills: are they reciprocally related past the first school years?阅读、语言和元认知技能:在小学一年级之后它们是否相互关联?
Read Writ. 2022 Oct 12:1-23. doi: 10.1007/s11145-022-10333-y.
5
Readers Recruit Executive Functions to Self-Correct Miscues During Oral Reading Fluency.读者在口语阅读流畅性过程中运用执行功能进行自我纠正错误。
Sci Stud Read. 2020;24(6):462-483. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2020.1720025. Epub 2020 Feb 20.
6
Factors that Influence Reading Acquisition in L2 English for Students in Bangalore, India.影响印度班加罗尔学生二语英语阅读习得的因素。
Read Writ. 2020 Sep;33(7):1809-1838. doi: 10.1007/s11145-020-10047-z. Epub 2020 Apr 15.
7
Estimating Model-Based Oral Reading Fluency: A Bayesian Approach.基于模型的口语阅读流畅性估计:一种贝叶斯方法。
Educ Psychol Meas. 2020 Oct;80(5):847-869. doi: 10.1177/0013164419900208. Epub 2020 Jan 20.
8
Reading Fluency As a Predictor of School Outcomes across Grades 4-9.阅读流畅性作为4至9年级学业成绩的预测指标
Front Psychol. 2017 Feb 14;8:200. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00200. eCollection 2017.