Off to a Slow Start: Four Profiles of Slow Readers in Second Grade

References

• Abbott, M., Wills, H., Miller, A., & Kaufman, J. (2012). The relationship of error rate and comprehension in second and third grade oral reading fluency. Reading Psychology, 33, 104–132.
   Google Scholar
• Ardoin, S. P., Binder, K. S., Foster, T. E., & Zawoyski, A. M. (2016). Repeated versus wide reading: A randomized control design study examining the impact of fluency interventions on underlying reading behavior. Journal of School Psychology, 59, 13–38.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2012). Using Mplus TECH11 and TECH14 to test the number of latent classes. Mplus Web Notes, 14, 22.
   Google Scholar
• Benjamin, R. G., Schwanenflugel, P. J., Meisinger, E. B., Groff, C., Kuhn, M. R., & Steiner, L. (2013). A spectrographically grounded scale for evaluating reading expressiveness. Reading Research Quarterly, 48(2), 105–133.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Betts, E. (1946). Foundations of reading instruction. New York: American Book Co.
   Google Scholar
• Buly, M. R., & Valencia, S. W. (2002). Below the bar: Profiles of students who fail state reading assessments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(3), 219–239. doi: 10.3102/01623737024003219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2004). Multimodel inference: Understanding AIC and BIC in model selection. Sociological Methods & Research, 33(2), 261–304.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bursuck, W. D., & Damer, M. (2007). Reading instruction for students who are at risk or have disabilities. Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Cabell, S. Q., Justice, L. M., Konold, T. R., & McGinty, A. S. (2011). Profiles of emergent literacy skills among preschool children who are at risk for academic difficulties. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26(1), 1–14. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cabell, S. Q., Justice, L. M., Logan, J. A., & Konold, T. R. (2013). Emergent literacy profiles among prekindergarten children from low-SES backgrounds: Longitudinal considerations. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 28(3), 608–620. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2013.03.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caldwell, J. S., & Leslie, L. (2005). Intervention strategies to follow informal reading inventory assessment: So what do I do now? Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Carver, R. P. (1992). Reading rate: Theory, research, and practical implications. Journal of Reading, 36, 84–95.
   Google Scholar
• Catts, H. W., Adlof, S. M., & Weismer, S. E. (2006). Language deficits in poor comprehenders: A case for the simple view of reading. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49(2), 278–293. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2006/023)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chall, J. S. (1983). Stages of reading development. New York: McGraw Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers.
   Google Scholar
• Crawford, L., Tindal, G., & Stieber, S. (2001). Using oral reading rate to predict student performance on statewide achievement tests. Educational Assessment, 7(4), 303–323.
   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 (NCES 2006–469). Washington, DC: US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Education. (2010). [State blinded for review.] Standards of Learning Test Blueprint, Grade 3 Reading.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Education. (2015). [State blinded for review.] Standards of Learning Technical Report, 2014-2015 Administration Cycle.
   Google Scholar
• Ehri, L. C. (2005). Learning to read words: Theory, findings, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9(2), 167–188. doi: 10.1207/s1532799xssr0902_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eldredge, J. L. (2005). Foundations of fluency: An exploration. Reading Psychology, 26(2), 161–181.
   Google Scholar
• Flanigan, K. (2007). A concept of word in text: A pivotal event in early reading acquisition. Journal of Literacy Research, 39, 37–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford, K. L., Cabell, S. Q., Konold, T. R., Invernizzi, M., & Gartland, L. B. (2013). Diversity among Spanish-speaking English language learners: Profiles of early literacy skills in kindergarten. Reading and Writing, 26(6), 889–912.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2001). Helping teachers formulate sound test accommodation decisions for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 16(3), 174–181.
   Google Scholar
• Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, L. S., & Capizzi, A. M. (2005). Identifying appropriate test accommodations for students with learning disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children, 37(6), 1–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Eaton, S. B., Hamlett, C., Binkley, E., & Crouch, R. (2000). Using objective data sources to enhance teacher judgments about test accommodations. Exceptional Children, 67(1), 67–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs, L., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M., & Jenkins, J. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 239–256.
   Google Scholar
• Halpin, P. F., & Kieffer, M. J. (2015). Describing profiles of instructional practice a new approach to analyzing classroom observation data. Educational Researcher, 44, doi: 10.3102/0013189X15590804.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. A. (2006). Oral reading fluency norms: A valuable assessment tool for reading teachers. The Reading Teacher, 59(7), 636–644. doi: 10.1598/RT.59.7.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. (2017). An update to compiled ORF norms (Technical Report No. 1702). Eugene, OR: Behavioral Research and Teaching, University of Oregon.
   Google Scholar
• Hendrix, M. (2013). The relationship of prosodic reading to reading rate and other constructs of reading ability (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Appalachian State University, Boone, NC.
   Google Scholar
• Hiebert, E. H. (2005). The effects of text difficulty on second graders' fluency development. Reading Psychology, 26(2), 183–209.
   Google Scholar
• Hiebert, E. H., & Fisher, C. W. (2002, April). Text matters in developing fluent reading. In Annual Meeting of the International Reading Association, San Francisco, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Huang, F. L. (2014). Using a bifactor model to assess the factor structure of the phonological awareness literacy screening for grades 1 through 3. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 32(7), 638–650.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hudson, R. F., Lane, H. B., & Pullen, P. C. (2005). Reading fluency assessment and instruction: What, why, and how? The Reading Teacher, 58(8), 702–714.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Invernizzi, M., & Hayes, L. (2004). Developmental-spelling research: a systematic imperative. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(2), 216–228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Invernizzi, M. A., Meier, J. D., & Juel, C. (2003). Phonological awareness literacy screening (PALS 1–3). Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.
   Google Scholar
• Invernizzi, M. A., Meier, J. D., & Juel, C. (2004). PALS 1-3 administration and scoring manual. Richmond, VA: Virginia State Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Invernizzi, M. A., Meier, J., & Juel, C. (2010). PALS 1-3 technical reference. Richmond, VA: Virginia State Department of Education.
   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(4), 719.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, M. K., Bryant, D. P., Bryant, B. R., & Park, Y. (2017). A synthesis of interventions for improving oral reading fluency of elementary students with learning disabilities. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 61(2), 116–125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, Y. S., Petscher, Y., Schatschneider, C., & Foorman, B. (2010). Does growth rate in oral reading fluency matter in predicting reading comprehension achievement? Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 652.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, Y. S. G., & Wagner, R. K. (2015). Text (oral) reading fluency as a construct in reading development: An investigation of its mediating role for children from grades 1 to 4. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19(3), 224–242.
   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(2), 310–321.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kostewicz, D. E., Kubina, R. M., Selfridge, K. A., & Gallagher, D. L. (2016). A Review of Fixed Fluency Criteria in Repeated Reading Studies. Reading Improvement, 53, 23–41.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, M. R., Schwanenflugel, P. J., Meisinger, E. B., Levy, B. A., & Rasinski, T. V. (2010). Aligning theory and assessment of reading fluency: Automaticity, prosody, and definitions of fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(2), 230–251.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, M. R., & Stahl, S. A. (2003). Fluency: A review of developmental and remedial practices. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 3–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6(2), 293–323. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(74)90015-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipson, M. Y., & Wixson, K. K. (1997). Assessment & instruction of reading and writing disability: An interactive approach. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Marcell, B. (2011). Putting fluency on a fitness plan: Building fluency’s meaning-making muscles. The Reading Teacher, 65(4), 242–249. doi: 10.1002/TRTR.01034
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mellard, D. F., McKnight, M., & Woods, K. (2009). Response to Intervention screening and progress: Monitoring practices in 41 local schools. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24(4), 186–195.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, J., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (2006). Prosody of syntactically complex sentences in the oral reading of young children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(4), 839–853.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, J., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (2008). A longitudinal study of the development of reading prosody as a dimension of oral reading fluency in early elementary school children. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(4), 336–354.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris, D., Bloodgood, J. W., Lomax, R. G., & Perney, J. (2003). Developmental steps in learning to read: A longitudinal study in kindergarten and first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 38(3), 302–328.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris, D., Bloodgood, J. W., Perney, J., Frye, E. M., Kucan, L., Trathen, W., … Schlagal, R. (2011). Validating craft knowledge: An empirical examination of elementary-grade students’ performance on an informal reading assessment. Elementary School Journal, 112(2), 205–233. doi: 10.1086/661522
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris, D., Pennell, A. M., Perney, J., & Trathen, W. (2018). Using subjective and objective measures to predict level of reading fluency at the end of first grade. Reading Psychology, 39(3), 253–270.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris, D., Trathen, W., Frye, E. M., Kucan, L., Ward, D., Schlagal, R., & Hendrix, M. (2013). The role of reading rate in the informal assessment of reading ability. Literacy Research and Instruction, 52(1), 52–64. doi: 10.1080/19388071.2012.702188
   Google Scholar
• Morris, D., Trathen, W., Gill, T., Schlagal, R., Ward, D., & Frye, E. M. (2017). Assessing Reading Rate in the Primary Grades (1–3). Reading Psychology, 38(7), 653–672.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris, D., Trathen, W., Perney, J., Gill, T., Schlagal, R., Ward, D., & Frye, E. M. (2017). Three DIBELS tasks vs. three informal reading/spelling tasks: A comparison of predictive validity. Reading Psychology, 38(3), 289–320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus statistical analysis with latent variables (Version 6). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
   Google Scholar
• National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (NIH Publication No. 00–4754). Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office. Paris, S. G., Carpenter
   Google Scholar
• Nevo, E., Brande, S., & Shaul, S. (2016). The effects of two different reading acceleration training programs on improving reading skills of second graders. Reading Psychology, 37(4), 533–546.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling, 14(4), 535–569.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paige, D. D., Rasinski, T. V., & Magpuri-Lavell, T. (2012). Is fluent, expressive reading important for high school readers? Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 56(1), 67–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearson, P. D. (2006). Foreward. In K. Goodman (Ed.), The truth about DIBELS: What it is, what it does (pp. v–xix). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Perfetti, C. A. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4), 357–383. doi: 10.1080/10888430701530730
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pierce, M. E., Katzir, T., Wolf, M., & Noam, G. G. (2007). Clusters of second and third grade dysfluent urban readers. Reading and Writing, 20(9), 885–907.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pikulski, J. J., & Chard, D. J. (2005). Fluency: Bridge between decoding and reading comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 58(6), 510–519.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinnell, G. S., Pikulski, J. J., Wixson, 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. Washington, DC: OERI, U. S. Department of Education; Princeton, NJ: ETS.
   Google Scholar
• Powell, W. R. (1970, May). The validity of the instructional reading level. Paper presented at the International Reading Association conference, Anaheim, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Rasinski, T. V. (2000). Commentary: Speed does matter in reading. The Reading Teacher, 54, 146–151.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasinski, T. V. (2001, April). Revisiting reading rate as a diagnostic tool for reading difficulties. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
   Google Scholar
• Rasinski, T. V. (2012). Why reading fluency should be hot!. The Reading Teacher, 65(8), 516–522.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasinski, T. V., & Padak, N. D. (1998). How elementary students referred for compensatory reading instruction perform on school-based measures of word recognition, fluency, and comprehension. Reading Psychology, 19(2), 185–216.
   Google Scholar
• Rasinski, T., Rikli, A., & Johnston, S. (2009). Reading fluency: More than automaticity? More than a concern for the primary grades? Literacy Research and Instruction, 48(4), 350–361. doi: 10.1080/19388070802468715
   Google Scholar
• Riedel, B. W. (2007). The relation between DIBELS, reading comprehension, and vocabulary in urban first-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(4), 546–562. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.42.4.5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roehrig, A. D., Petscher, Y., Nettles, S. M., Hudson, R. F., & Torgesen, J. K. (2008). Accuracy of the DIBELS oral reading fluency measure for predicting third grade reading comprehension outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 46(3), 343–366.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samuels, S. J. (2002). Reading fluency: Its development and assessment. In A. E. Farstrup & S. J. Samuels. (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 165–184). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• Samuels, S. J. (2006). Toward a model of reading fluency. In S. J. Samuels & A. E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about fluency instruction (pp. 24–46). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• Samuels, S. J. (2007). The DIBELS tests: Is speed of barking at print what we mean by reading fluency? Reading Research Quarterly, 42(3), 407–566.
   Google Scholar
• Schrauben, J. E. (2010). Prosody's contribution to fluency: An examination of the theory of automatic information processing. Reading Psychology, 31(1), 82–92.
   Google Scholar
• Schreiber, P. A. (1980). On the acquisition of reading fluency. Journal of Literacy Research, 12(3), 177–186.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharp, A. C., Sinatra, G. M., & Reynolds, R. E. (2008). The development of children's orthographic knowledge: A microgenetic perspective. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(3), 206–226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shelton, N. R., Altwerger, B., & Jordan, N. (2009). Does DIBELS put reading first? Literacy Research and Instruction, 48(2), 137–148.
   Google Scholar
• Shinn, M. R., Good, R. H., Knutson, N., Tilly, W. D., & Collins, V. (1992). Curriculum-based reading fluency: A confirmatory analysis of its relation to reading. School Psychology Review, 21, 458–478.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Speece, D. L., & Cooper, D. H. (2004). Methodological issues in research on language and early literacy from the perspective of early identification and instruction. In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. J. Ehren, & K. Apel (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (pp. 130–153). New York: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Stecker, S. K., Roser, N. L., & Martinez, M. G. (1998). Understanding of oral reading fluency. In T. Shanahan & F. V. Rodriguez-Brown (Eds.), 47th yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 295–310). Chicago: National Reading Conference.
   Google Scholar
• Therrien, W. J. (2004). Fluency and comprehension gains as a result of repeated reading a meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 25(4), 252–261.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tindal, G., & Marston, D. (1996). Technical adequacy of alternative reading measures as performance assessments. Exceptionality, 6(4), 201–230.
   Google Scholar
• Toyama, Y., Hiebert, E. H., & Pearson, P. D. (2017). An analysis of the text complexity of leveled passages in four popular classroom reading assessments. Educational Assessment, 22(3), 139–170.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valencia, S. W., & Buly, M. R. (2004). Behind test scores: What struggling readers really need. The Reading Teacher, 57(6), 520–531.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valencia, S. W., Smith, A. T., Reece, A. M., Li, M., Wixson, K. K., & Newman, H. (2010). Oral reading fluency assessment: Issues of construct, criterion, and consequential validity. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(3), 270–291. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.45.3.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, J. L., Skinner, C. H., Floyd, R. G., Hale, A. D., Neddenriep, C., & Kirk, E. P. (2011). Words correct per minute: The variance in standardized reading scores accounted for by reading speed. Psychology in the Schools, 48(2), 87–101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zutell, J., & Rasinski, T. V. (1991). Training teachers to attend to their students’ oral reading fluency. Theory into Practice, 30(3), 211–217.
   Google Scholar