Post on 27-Mar-2015
USING EARLY LITERACY ASSESSMENTS TO PREDICT READING ACHIEVEMENT
Anna Michelle Gillard, PhD, NCSPNASP Annual Conference March 5, 2010
Early Literacy Assessment
Essential to reading acquisition Early literacy skills include
Phonological awareness Vocabulary skills Letter knowledge
Purposes of assessment include: Progress monitoring Identification of struggling students
Why is this important?
Monitor progress Identify struggling students Develop appropriate interventions
Individual Growth & Development Indicators Early literacy measures created through collaboration
between the Universities of Minnesota, Kansas, and Oregon Created to measure early childhood development, one area
of which is early literacy Include three subtests
Picture Naming Rhyming Alliteration
Reliability and validity
(McConnell, Priest, Davis, & McEvoy, 2000; Missal & McConnell, 2004)
Picture Naming
1 minute, timed fluency measure of expressive language
Child is required to name pictures
Rhyming
• 2 minute fluency measure of phonological awareness
• Child is required to identify the picture in a set of 3 that sounds like the target picture
Alliteration
• 2 minute fluency measure of phonological awareness
• Child is required to identify the picture in a set of 3 that starts with the same sound as the target picture
DIBELS
Measures of early literacy skills Phonological awareness Letter knowledge
Timed, fluency measures Formerly mandated through the Reading First
grant Research shows that DIBELS are predictive of
reading achievement
(Gillard, 2008; Good, Simmons, & Kame’enui, 2001; Kaminski & Good, 1996)
Florida Assessments In Reading (FAIR)
New statewide reading assessment (K-12) Three levels of assessment:
Broad Screening Targeted Diagnostics Progress Monitoring
Primary measure for K-2: Probability of Reading Success (PRS)
Participants: Cohort 1 (2007-2008)
95 students in five VPK classes Demographic make-up 82 remaining in Kindergarten (08-09) 75 remaining in First grade (09-10)
However, FAIR data not available for all students
Participants: Cohort 2 (2008-2009)
180 students in 11 VPK classes Demographic make-up 165 included in this sample
FAIR data not available for all students
Measures
• IGDIs– Administered Fall, Winter, & Spring– All measures attempted
• DIBELS– Only Cohort 1– ISF and LNF administered within first 30 days of school– Reading First schools given DIBELS three times
• FAIR– AP 1: Administered between 6th and 40th day of school– AP 2: Administered between 66th and 100th day of
school– All students: Broad Screening, Broad Diagnostics– Some students: Targeted Diagnostics
Cohort 1 Results: FAIR
ANOVA for PRS-AP1 ANOVA for PRS-AP2
•Picture Naming, Rhyming, Alliteration included at each measurement period
Measurement Time
df F Sig.
Fall 3 .960 .417
Winter 3 4.208 .009
Spring 3 3.290 .026
Measurement Time
df F Sig.
Fall 3 1.541 .212
Winter 3 1.584 .201
Spring 3 2.665 .055
Cohort 2 Results: FAIR
ANOVA for PRS-AP1 ANOVA for PRS-AP2
•Picture Naming, Rhyming, Alliteration included at each measurement period
Measurement Time
df F Sig.
Fall3 7.540 .000
Winter3 12.138 .000
Spring3 17.620 .000
Measurement Time
df F Sig.
Fall3 9.741 .000
Winter3 5.337 .002
Spring3 13.874 .000
Cohort 1 Results: FAIR
Coefficients for PRS-AP1
Model t Sig.
PN1 1.040 .302
RHY1 -.261 .795
ALL1 .963 .339
PN2 1.367 .176
RHY2 -.718 .475
ALL2 2.610 .011*
PN3 .494 .623
RHY3 .359 .721
ALL3 2.204 .031*
Cohort 2 Results: FAIR
Coefficients for PRS-AP1
Model t Sig.
PN1 2.424 .017*
RHY1 1.233 .220
ALL1 1.878 .063
PN2 3.476 .001*
RHY2 .805 .422
ALL2 2.311 .022*
PN3 4.172 .000*
RHY3 -.075 .940ALL3 3.503 .001*
Coefficients for PRS-AP2
Model t Sig.
PN1 2.393 .018*
RHY1 .747 .457
ALL1 1.419 .158
PN2 3.473 .001*
RHY2 1.112 .268
ALL2 1.130 .260
PN3 4.174 .000*
RHY3 .459 .647
ALL3 1.893 .060*
Results: FAIR
•Picture Naming, Rhyming, Alliteration included at all measurement times
Model Summary Cohort 1
Measurement Time R2 Adj. R2
Fall AP1 .041 -.002Winter AP1 .157 .119Spring AP1 .130 .091Fall AP2 .065 .023Winter AP2 .066 .024Spring AP2 .108 .067
Results: FAIR
Picture Naming, Rhyming, Alliteration included at all measurement times
Model Summary Cohort 2
Measurement Time
R2 Adj. R2
Fall AP1 .140 .121
Winter AP1 .197 .181
Spring AP1 .269 .253
Fall AP2 .102 .083
Winter AP2 .163 .146
Spring AP2 .227 .210
Results: DIBELS
Measurement Time df F Sig.
Fall 3 3.003 .036
Winter 3 8.428 .000
Spring 3 4.603 .005
ANOVA for DIBELS ISF ANOVA for DIBELS LNF
Measurement Time df F Sig.
Fall 3 4.953 .003
Winter 3 9.116 .000
Spring 3 7.064 .000
Results: DIBELS
Coefficients for DIBELS LNF
Model t Sig.PN1 2.893 .005*RHY1 .235 .815ALL1 .827 .411PN2 3.346 .001*RHY2 -.870 .387
ALL2 2.581 .012*
PN3 .726 .470
RHY3 1.128 .263
ALL3 2.771 .007*
Coefficients for DIBELS LNF
Model t Sig.PN1 2.707 .008*RHY1 -.063 .950ALL1 -.090 .929PN2 2.608 .011*RHY2 -1.452 .151
ALL2 3.404 .001*
PN3 .593 .555
RHY3 -.026 .979
ALL3 2.918 .005*
Results: DIBELS
Model Summary ISF
Measurement time
R2 Adj. R2
Fall .110 .073
Winter .257 .227
Spring .163 .127
Model Summary LNF
Measurement time
R2 Adj. R2
Fall .169 .135
Winter .273 .243
Spring .230 .197
Implications
Results suggest preschool measures can be used to predict kindergarten and some first grade reading measures
If the PRS score can be used to predict reading success as measured by the SAT-10, and the IGDIs can be used to predict PRS scores, then we may be able to predict, in preschool, which students are most likely to struggle on the SAT-10
References
DIBELS- http://dibels.uoregon.edu/index.php Gillard, A.M. (2008). The Predictive Validity of Kindergarten
Assessment Good, Simmons, & Kame’enui (2001). Kaminski, R.A. & Good, R.H. (1996). Toward a technology for
assessing basic early literacy skills. School Psychology Review, 25, 215-227.
McConnell, S. R., Priest, J. S., Davis, S. D., & McEvoy, M. A. (2002). Best practices in measuring growth and development for preschool children. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best Practices in School Psychology IV (pp. 1231– 1246). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
Missall, K. & McConnell, S.R. (2004). Psychometric characteristics of Individual Growth and Development Indicators: Picture Naming, Rhyming, and Alliteration
Questions?
Contact Information
Anna Michelle Gillard, PhD, NCSP gillardm@stlucie.k12.fl.us