The gap in reading achievement continues to be consistent, despite No Child Left Behind goals to narrow these gaps among minority and other subgroup populations. This gap is especially profound for students with disabilities, and any evidence to support progress monitoring of oral reading fluency (ORF) and comprehension will inform educational policy and practice. The theory of automaticity explains that a reader can focus more attention on the meaning of a reading passage when less attention is needed for word and sound recognition. The literature has suggested that reading comprehension can be improved through efforts to improve ORF. The central purpose of this quantitative, correlation study was to determine the relationship between gains in ORF and gains in reading comprehension of both informational and literary texts among 46 students in Grades 3 through 6 with reading difficulties and specific learning disabilities in a rural southern U.S. school district. A second purpose was to determine whether repeated readings or cold reads is the better predictor of reading comprehension. Gains in ORF rates over a 10-week period, determined by the difference in pre- and postmeasurements on two curriculum-based measures of ORF, were regressed on reading comprehension scores on the Measures of Academic Procedures test. There was not a statistically significant relationship between ORF and reading comprehension gains, and neither repeated readings nor cold reads was statistically a better predictor of reading gains. The findings offer several suggestions for the continuation of support for students who struggle with the reading process. Implications for social change included improved reading levels for those with reading and other specific learning disabilities.
|School Location:||United States -- Minnesota|
|Source:||DAI-A 71/12, Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Literacy, Reading instruction|
|Keywords:||Curriculum-based measures, Oral reading, Oral reading fluency, Reading disabilities, Specific learning disabilities|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be