國立虎尾科技大學 |

Universal Assessment of Early Reading Ability in Title I Schools.

Record Type:	Language materials, manuscript : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Universal Assessment of Early Reading Ability in Title I Schools./
Author:	Abercrombie, Laura Johnson.
Description:	1 online resource (90 pages)
Notes:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-06, Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International85-06B.
Subject:	Special education. -
Online resource:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798381095777

Universal Assessment of Early Reading Ability in Title I Schools.
Abercrombie, Laura Johnson.

Universal Assessment of Early Reading Ability in Title I Schools. - 1 online resource (90 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-06, Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Valdosta State University, 2023.

Includes bibliographical references

Identifying at-risk readers in early grades is an ongoing challenge for educators, especially those in Title I schools where environmental and economic disadvantages may negatively impact students' reading ability. The purpose of the current study was to compare methods of identifying at-risk readers in kindergarten through third grade in Title I schools. This study was conducted in two Title I elementary schools using Acadience Reading Diagnostic to measure reading achievement and growth in students with reading disabilities, students at risk of reading disabilities, and typically reading students.Reading composite scores (RCS) were significantly different between the typical group and each of the other two groups (at-risk and identified groups) at all grade levels. Growth rate classifications were significant between groups only for kindergarten and first-grade participants. Among the three risk identification methods, there was fair agreement between low-achievement (LA) and low-growth (LG) methods and moderate agreement between dual-discrepancy (DD) and the other two methods. RCS means were found to be significantly lower than published norms. Growth rate classification means also fell significantly below published norms except for participants in first grade. Application of the LA and DD methods to local norms resulted in the identification of fewer than half the number of at-risk participants compared to published norms.The dual discrepancy method was recommended to identify at-risk readers in these grades because both achievement scores and growth rates were significantly different among kindergarten and first-grade groups. Due to a large number of participants identified as at-risk based on the use of published norms and the lack of significant difference in growth rates among groups in second and third grade, it was recommended that the LA method based on local norms be used to identify at-risk readers in second and third grades.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2024

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798381095777Subjects--Topical Terms:

567627
Special education.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Reading diagnosticIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

Universal Assessment of Early Reading Ability in Title I Schools.
LDR:03338ntm a22003977 4500 001 1143204
005 20240513060822.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 250605s2023 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798381095777
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI30696224
035 $a AAI30696224
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Abercrombie, Laura Johnson. $3 1467821
245 1 0 $a Universal Assessment of Early Reading Ability in Title I Schools.
264 0 $c 2023
300 $a 1 online resource (90 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-06, Section: B.
500 $a Advisor: Lamb, Katherine.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Valdosta State University, 2023.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Identifying at-risk readers in early grades is an ongoing challenge for educators, especially those in Title I schools where environmental and economic disadvantages may negatively impact students' reading ability. The purpose of the current study was to compare methods of identifying at-risk readers in kindergarten through third grade in Title I schools. This study was conducted in two Title I elementary schools using Acadience Reading Diagnostic to measure reading achievement and growth in students with reading disabilities, students at risk of reading disabilities, and typically reading students.Reading composite scores (RCS) were significantly different between the typical group and each of the other two groups (at-risk and identified groups) at all grade levels. Growth rate classifications were significant between groups only for kindergarten and first-grade participants. Among the three risk identification methods, there was fair agreement between low-achievement (LA) and low-growth (LG) methods and moderate agreement between dual-discrepancy (DD) and the other two methods. RCS means were found to be significantly lower than published norms. Growth rate classification means also fell significantly below published norms except for participants in first grade. Application of the LA and DD methods to local norms resulted in the identification of fewer than half the number of at-risk participants compared to published norms.The dual discrepancy method was recommended to identify at-risk readers in these grades because both achievement scores and growth rates were significantly different among kindergarten and first-grade groups. Due to a large number of participants identified as at-risk based on the use of published norms and the lack of significant difference in growth rates among groups in second and third grade, it was recommended that the LA method based on local norms be used to identify at-risk readers in second and third grades.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2024
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Special education. $3 567627
650 4 $a Speech therapy. $3 715798
650 4 $a Elementary education. $3 1148439
650 4 $a Disability studies. $3 809395
653 $a Reading diagnostic
653 $a Elementary schools
653 $a Dual-discrepancy
653 $a Reading composite scores
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0529
690 $a 0460
690 $a 0201
690 $a 0524
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a Valdosta State University. $b Communication Sciences and Disorders. $3 1467822
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 85-06B.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30696224 $z click for full text (PQDT)