The Contributions of Oral and Silent Reading Fluency to Reading Comprehension

References

• Barth, A.E., Catts, H.W., & Anthony, J.L., (2009). The component skills underling reading fluency in adolescent readers: A latent variable analysis. Reading and Writing, 22, 567–590.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berninger, V.W., Abbott, R.D., Trivedi, P., Olson, E., Gould, L., Hiramatsu, S., & Westhaggen, S.Y., (2010). Applying the multiple dimensions of reading fluency to assessment and instruction. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 28, 3–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braze, D., Tabor, W., Shankweiler, D.P., & Mencl, W.E. (2007). Speaking up for vocabulary: Reading skill difference in young adults. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 226–243.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breaux, K.C. (2009) WIAT-3 technical manual. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Burge, P.E. (1983). Comprehension and rate: Oral vs. silent reading for low achievers. Reading Horizons, 23, 201–206.
   Google Scholar
• Chall, J.S. (1996). Learning to read: The great debate (Revised). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Daane, M.C., Campbell, J.R., Grigg, W.S., Goodman, M.J., & Oranje, A. (2005). Fourth-grade students reading aloud: NAEP 2002 Special Study of Oral Reading. U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
   Google Scholar
• Elgart, D.B. (1978). Oral reading, silent reading, and listening comprehension: A comparative study. Journal of Reading Behavior, 10, 203–207.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fletcher, J., & Pumfrey, P.D. (1988). Differences in text comprehension amongst 7–8 year old children. School Psychology International, 9, 133–145.
   Google Scholar
• Floyd, R.G., Meisinger, E.B., Gregg, N., & Keith, T.Z. (2012). An explanation of reading comprehension across development using models from tell–Horn–Carroll theory: Support for integrative models of reading. Psychology in the Schools, 48, 725–743.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (1992). Identifying a measure for monitoring student reading progress. School Psychology Review, 21, 45–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. (1988). The validity of informal reading comprehension measures. Remedial & Special Education, 9, 20–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs, L.S., & Maxwell, L. (1988). Interactive effects of reading mode, production format, and structural importance of text among LD pupils. Learning Disability Quarterly, 11, 97–105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Good, R.H., & Kaminski, R.A., & Dill, S. (2002). DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency. In R.H. Good & R.A. Kaminski (Eds.), Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement. Available: http://dibels.uoregon.edu/.
   Google Scholar
• Hammill, D.D., Wiederholt, J.L., & Allen, E.A. (2006). Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency. Austin, TX: Pro-ed.
   Google Scholar
• Hiebert, E.H., Samuels, S.J., & Rasinski, T. (2012). Comprehension-based silent reading rates: What do we know? What do we need to knowLiteracy Research and Instruction, 51, 110–124.
   Google Scholar
• Holmes, B.C. (1985). The effect of four different modes of reading on comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 575–585.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoover, W.A., & Gough, P.B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2, 127–160.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenkins, J.R., Fuchs, L.S., van den Broek, P., Espin, C., & Deno, S.L. (2003). Sources of individual differences in reading comprehension and reading fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 719–729.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenkins, J.R., & Jewell, M. (1993). Examining the validity of two measures for formative teaching: Reading aloud and maze. Exceptional Children, 59, 421–432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, E.B. (1932). A comparison of comprehension results in oral and silent reading. Peabody Journal of Education, 9, 292–296.
   Google Scholar
• Keenan, J.M., Betjemann, R.S., & Olson, R.K. (2008). Reading comprehension tests vary in the skills they assess: Differential dependence on decoding and oral comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 12, 281–300.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kendeou, P., van den Broek, P., White, M.J., & Lynch, J.S. (2009). Predicting reading comprehension in early elementary school: The independent contributions of oral language and decoding skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 765–778.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, Y., Wagner, R.K., & Foster, E. (2011). Relations among oral reading fluency, silent reading fluency, and reading comprehension: A latent variable study of first-grade readers. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15, 338–362.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klauda, S.L., & Guthrie, J.T. (2008). Relationships of three components of reading fluency to reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 310–321.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kline, R.B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, M.R., & Schwanenflugel, P.J. (2007). Fluency in the classroom. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, M.R., Schwanenflugel, P.J., & Meisinger, E.B. (2010). Aligning theory and assessment of reading fluency: Automaticity, prosody, and definitions of fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 232–253.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, M.R., & Stahl, S.S. (2003). Fluency: A review of developmental and remedial practices. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 3–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S.J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leslie, L., & Caldwell, J.S. (2006). Qualitative Reading Inventory (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Little, J.A. (1988). A test of missing completely at random for multivariate data with missing values. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83, 1198–1202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacGinitie, W.H., MacGinitie, R.K., Maria, K., & Dreyer, L.G. (2007). Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests, 4th edition technical report supplement forms S and T. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside Press and Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• MacGinitie, W.H., MacGinitie, R.K., Maria, K., Dreyer, L.G., & Hughes, K.E. (2007). Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests, (4th ed.). Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside Press and Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, S.D., & Smith, D.E. (1985). Differences in literal and inferential comprehension after reading orally and silently. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 341–348.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muster, V., Hulme, C., Snowling, M.J., & Stevenson, J. (2004). Phonemes, rimes, vocabulary, and grammatical skills as foundations of early reading development: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 40, 665–681.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the national reading panel. Washington DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Norton, E.S., & Wolf, M. (2012). Rapid automatized naming (RAN) and reading fluency: Implications for understanding and treatment of reading disabilities. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 427452
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ouellette, G., & Beers, A. (2010). A not-so-simple view of reading: How oral vocabulary and visual-word recognition complicate the story. Reading and Writing, 23, 189–208.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinnell, G.S., Pikulski, J.J., Wixon, K.K., Campbell, J.R., Gough, P.B., & Beatty, A.S. (1995). Listening to children read aloud: Data from NAEP's integrated reading performance record (IRPR) at grade 4. The nation's report card. Report No. 23-FR-04. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Price, K.W., Meisinger, E.B., D’Mello, S.K., & Louwerse, M.M. (2012). Silent reading fluency using underlining: Evidence for an alternative method of assessment. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 606–618.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prior, S.M., & Welling, K.A., (2001). “Read in your head”: A Vygotskian analysis of the transition for oral to silent reading. Reading Psychology, 22, 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Psychological Corporation. (2009). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Pullen, P.C., Tuckwiller, E. D., Konold, T.R., Maynard, K.L., & Coyne, M.D. (2010). A tiered intervention model for early vocabulary instruction: The effects of tiered instruction for young students at risk for reading disability. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 25, 110–123.
   Google Scholar
• Radach, R., Schmitten, C., Glover, L., & Huestegge, L. (2009). How children read for comprehension: Eye movements in developing readers. In R.K. Wagner, C. Schatschneider, & C. Phythian-Sence (Eds.) Beyond decoding: The behavioral and biological foundations of reading comprehension (pp. 75–106). New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Rayner, K. & Pollatsek, A. (1989). Reading psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Salasso, A. (1986) Cognitive processing in oral and silent reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 59–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwanenflugel, P.J., Meisinger, E.B., Wisenbaker, J.M., Kuhn, M.R., Strauss, G.P., & Morris, R.D. (2006). Becoming a fluent and automatic reader in the early elementary school years. Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 496–522.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwanenflugel, P.J., Morris, R.K., Kuhn, M.R., Strauss, G.P., & Sieczko, J.M. (2008). The influence of word unit size on the development of Stroop interference in early word decoding. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2, 177–203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Senechal, M. (2006). Testing the home literacy model: Parent involvement in kindergarten is differentially related to Grade 4 reading comprehension, spelling, and reading for pleasure. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 59–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Share, D.L. (2008). On the anglocentricities of current reading research and practice: The perils of overreliance on an “outlier” orthography. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 584–615.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw, R., & Shaw, D. (2002). DIBELS oral reading fluency-based indicators of third grade reading skills for Colorado State Assessment Program (CSAP). (Technical Report). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.
   Google Scholar
• Shinn, M.R., Good, R.H., Knutson, N., Tilly, W.D., & Collins, V.L. (1992). Curriculum-based measurement: A confirmatory analysis of its relationship to reading. School Psychology Review, 21, 459–479.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shinn, M.R., & Shinn, M.M. (2002). AIMSweb training workbook: Administration and scoring of reading maze for use in general outcome measurement. Eden Prairie, MN: Edformation.
   Google Scholar
• Siegel, L.S. (1993). Phonological processing deficits as the basis of a reading disability. Developmental Review, 13, 246–257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sweet, A.P., & Snow, C.E. (2003). Rethinking reading comprehension: Solving problems in the teaching of literacy. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.), Boston, MA: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Vellutino, F.R., Fletcher, J.M., Snowling, M.J., & Scanlon, D.M. (2004). Specific reading disability (dyslexia): What have we learned in the past four decadesJournal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 2–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vellutino, F.R., Tunmer, W.E., Jaccard, J.J., & Chen, R. (2007). Components of reading ability: Multivariate evidence of a convergent skills model of reading development. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 3–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wechsler, D. (2001). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (2nd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Wolf, M., Bowers, P., & Biddle, K. R. (2000). Naming-speed processes, timing, and reading: A conceptual review. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 387–407.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodcock, R.W., McGrew, K.S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K., Schrank, F. A., & Mather, N. (2007). The Woodcock-Johnson III Normative Update (WJ III NU). Itasch, IL: Riverside Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Yovanoff, P., Duesbery, L., Alonzo, J., & Tindal, G. (2005). Grade-level invariance of a theoretical causal structure predicting reading comprehension with vocabulary and oral reading fluency. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24, 4–12.
   Google Scholar