Readability And Its Effects On Standardized Assessment Outcomes. April Ward; Mara Charles; Amanda Barlow; Crystal Randolph,Corine Myers-Jennings, Ruth Renee Hanniba

Barlow, Amanda

Charles, Mara

Hannibal, Ruth Renee

Myers-Jennings, Corine

Randolph, Crystal

Ward, April

Vtext Digital Repository

READABILITY AND ITS EFFECTS ON STANDARDIZED ASSESSMENT OUTCOMESReadability is the ease at which written text can be understood bythe reader. Readability is especially important when creatingstandardized assessments and screenings that are used to classifystudents that may have reading difficulties and/or identify students whomay be at risk for developing reading disorders. Research completedon readability concludes it is an important factor to consider whenanalyzing standardized test scores(Homan & Hewitt, 2004). Readabilityis one of many factors that may influence the validity of an assessment.Consequently, it is important that the readability of such assessments iscalculated prior to administration.In a recent article discussing the reform of reading achievementtests, Schutz (2013) analyzed the reading passages from readingachievement tests and found that most were not written on theappropriate grade-level. To offset, the variability in grade-levelappropriateness, test creators adjust the complexity of comprehensionquestions, which often accompany reading passages. When thereadability of passages on standardized measurements do not matchthe intended grade level, results cannot be considered accurate.Students’ knowledge of a particular content may be misinterpreted,which could cause them to be retained in their current grade level orthey may receive an incorrect diagnosis concerning reading ability.Because speech-language pathologists often use standardizedmeasurements to diagnose literacy deficits, it is important to ascertain ifthe readability of these measurements are valid and reliable.In a previous article, Klare (1974-1975) discusses a number offormulas for calculating the ease at which a reader can understand atext or passage. Assessing readability can be completed by using oneof several formulas including Fry, SMOG Index, and Flesch-Kincaidamong others. The varying methods used for each formula explains thedifferences in readability scores when calculated. For example, the Fryformula uses a combination of the total number of sentences andsyllables in a 100-word sample to find the resultant grade level. TheSMOG Index accounts for polysyllables in sentences; whereas Flesch-Kincaid formulas accounts for the number of words in a sentence andthe number of syllables in a word.The purpose of this study is to evaluate the readability level ofpassages on three standardized measurements: the Dynamic Indicatorsof Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS), the Gray Oral Reading Test(GORT), and the Georgia Milestones Assessment System (GMAS).Three readability tools will be used to measure readability levels:Microsoft Word, an online readability calculator, and calculation by handusing a readability formula.MethodologyIntroduction and BackgroundHewitt, M. A. & Homan, S.P. (2003). Readability level of standardized test items and student performance: The forgotten validity variable. Reading Research and Instruction, 43 (2), 1-16. Klare, G.R. (1974-1975). Assessing readability. Reading Research Quarterly, 10 (1),  62-102. Schutz, D. (2013). Toward educational testing reform: Inside reading achievement tests.  Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 21 (90), 1-32.ReferencesDiscussionA readability level that is too high on tests such as the GMAS,could lead to a student failing a high stakes test and cause them to beretained. A readability level that is too low may result in high testresults. Consequently, the student could potentially be placed in aclass too difficult for his academic level causing him to struggle.Implications for the DIBELS, a universal screening and progressmonitoring tool used at the elementary level, suggest that highreadability levels could place students in at risk categories when theymay have grade appropriate reading levels. Low readability level forstandardized tests such as the GORT may result in underidentification of students with reading difficulties.When drafting reading passages for standardized assessments,test developers should ensure that the readability levels are grade-appropriate prior to publication. It is imperative for high stakes tests tobe as valid and reliable as possible because of their use as a measureof student performance in the classroom (Hewitt & Homan, 2004).In a future study, it would be beneficial to examine studentperformance on these assessments in addition to calculatingreadability level. By factoring in student performance, we would havea more accurate representation of the effects of readability on testscores.The readability results for the DIBELS were Grade 8 on the Fry Graph, 6.8 according to the SMOG Index,and 7.1 as the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level. The readability results for the GORT were Grade 5 on the Fry Graph,2.8 according to the SMOG Index, and 4.4 as the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level. The readability results for the GMASwere Grade 7 on the Fry Graph, 5.9 according to the SMOG Index, and 5.8 as the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level.Results8576.82.85.97.14.45.80123456789DIBELS GORT GMASFry Graph (Hand Calculation)SMOG Index (Online Calculator)Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (Microsoft Word)The data gathered from this research study proves that there isa discrepancy in the readability level on the previously mentionedtests. Prior to calculating the readability levels of the DIBELS, GORT,and GMAS, our assumption was that each assessment’s readingpassage would be at the appropriate reading level for a student ingrade five. All three of the readability formulas indicated that thereading passages on the DIBELS were above a fifth grade readinglevel. The passages from the GMAS were calculated to be appropriatefor a fifth grade student according to the SMOG Index and Flesch-Kincaid formulas, but too high based on the Fry formula. Contrary tothe appropriate reading level score produced by the Fry Graph, theresults from the SMOG Index and the Flesch-Kincaid formulaindicated that the GORT passages were below a fifth grade readinglevel. The Fry Graph consistently yielded higher readability scores foreach assessment when compared to the SMOG Index and Flesch-Kincaid Formula.ImplicationsTo determine readability levels, three calculation methods were used on the DIBELS, GORT, and GMASreading passages. The researchers completed the calculations by hand, using an online readability calculator, andMicrosoft Word. The Fry formula was used for the hand calculation. Each passage was divided into three sectionsof 100 words. If the one-hundredth word fell in the middle of a sentence, the next segment would begin with a newsentence. The number of sentences and syllables within each section was counted and the totals were recorded.When calculating the total amount of sentences in a 100 word section, the last sentence was estimated to thenearest 1/10th. The average number of sentences and syllables were gathered and then used to find thecorresponding readability level using the Fry Graph for Estimating Reading Ages.The researchers conducted the online readability calculation by inserting the reading passages from eachassessment onto www.readabilty-score.com. The website reported several sets of results using various readabilityformulas; however, the researchers used the numbers from the SMOG Index. Finally, the researchers usedMicrosoft Word to calculate readability. The researchers then copied each passage onto a word document andthen clicked on the “File” tab “Options” “Proofing” . Under the heading, “When correcting spelling andgrammar in Word,” the researchers checked the box next to “Show readability statistics.” Next, each researcherclicked on the “Review” tab “Spelling & Grammar.” The results appeared in a new window, and included theFlesch-Kincaid Grade Level. To ensure reliability of readability data, two of the three researchers completedreadability calculations for each reading measure. Comparison of the calculations for each reading measurerevealed 100% agreement.April Ward; Mara Charles; Amanda Barlow; Crystal Randolph, PhD, CCC-SLP; Corine Myers-Jennings, PhD, CCC-SLP; Ruth Renee Hannibal, PhD, CCC-SLPValdosta State UniversityGrade LevelStandardized TestsReadability Test Results

Readability And Its Effects On Standardized Assessment Outcomes

https://vtext.valdosta.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10428/4762/CharlesWardBarlowReadabilityposter.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Readability And Its Effects On Standardized Assessment Outcomes

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Vtext Digital Repository