Can We Learn From Student Mistakes in a Formative,Reading Comprehension Assessment?     

Bowen Liu  Patrick C. Kennedy  Ben Seipel  Sarah E. Carlson  Gina Biancarosa  Mark L. Davison 《Journal of Educational Measurement》2019,56(4):815-835

This article describes an ongoing project to develop a formative, inferential reading comprehension assessment of causal story comprehension. It has three features to enhance classroom use: equated scale scores for progress monitoring within and across grades, a scale score to distinguish among low‐scoring students based on patterns of mistakes, and a reading efficiency index. Instead of two response types for each multiple‐choice item, correct and incorrect, each item has three response types: correct and two incorrect response types. Prior results on reliability, convergent and discriminant validity, and predictive utility of mistake subscores are briefly described. The three‐response‐type structure of items required rethinking the item response theory (IRT) modeling. IRT‐modeling results are presented, and implications for formative assessments and instructional use are discussed.  相似文献   

Making the right connections: Differential effects of reading intervention for subgroups of comprehenders     

Kristen L. McMaster  Paul van den Broek  Christine A. Espin  Mary Jane White  David N. Rapp  Panayiota Kendeou  Catherine M. Bohn-Gettler  Sarah Carlson 《Learning and individual differences》2012,22(1):100-111

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of different types of questioning interventions on students' reading comprehension. Fourth-grade students (n = 246) were identified as struggling, average, or good readers and assigned randomly within school to one of three questioning interventions: two inferential conditions (Causal or General) or one literal condition (“Who, What, Where, When” or W-questioning). Teachers delivered the interventions for 20–30 min, 2–4 times per week, for 8–10 weeks. All readers made reliable pre- to posttest comprehension gains as measured by story recall (ps < .001 to .04). Differential effects for intervention were found between two subgroups of struggling comprehenders—elaborators and paraphrasers. Elaborators benefited more than paraphrasers from Causal questioning (d = .86) whereas paraphrasers benefited more than elaborators from General questioning (d = 1.46). These findings suggest that identifying subgroups is important in developing and evaluating the effectiveness of reading comprehension interventions.  相似文献