 |
ERIC ED544195: Evaluating the Screening Accuracy of the Florida Ass... |
 |
by ERIC |
 |
Thumbnail |
|
Download |
 |
Web page |
|
|
|
Florida requires that students who do not meet grade- |
|
level reading proficiency standards on the end-of-year |
|
state assessment (Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test, |
|
FCAT) receive intensive reading intervention. With the |
|
stakes so high, teachers and principals are interested in |
|
using screening or diagnostic assessments to identify |
|
students with a strong likelihood of failing to meet |
|
grade-level proficiency standards on the FCAT. Since 2009 |
|
Florida has administered a set of interim assessments |
|
(Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading, FAIR) |
|
three times a year (fall, winter, and spring) to obtain |
|
information on students' probability of meeting grade- |
|
level standards on the end-of-year FCAT. In 2010/11 the |
|
Florida Department of Education aligned the FCAT to new |
|
standards (Next Generation Sunshine State Standards) and |
|
renamed it the FCAT 2.0 but retained the 2009/10 |
|
cutscores. In 2011/12 it changed the FCAT 2.0 cutscores. |
|
The share of students meeting grade-level standards on |
|
the FCAT 2.0 fell to 53 percent in 2012 from 72 percent |
|
in 2011. This drop led the Florida Department of |
|
Education to partner with the Regional Educational |
|
Laboratory Southeast to analyze student performance on |
|
the FAIR reading comprehension screen and FCAT 2.0 to |
|
determine how well the FAIR and the 2011 FCAT 2.0 scores |
|
predict 2012 FCAT 2.0 performance. The study addresses |
|
two research questions: (1) What is the association |
|
between performance on the 2012 FCAT 2.0 and two scores |
|
from the FAIR reading comprehension screen across grades |
|
4 10 and the three FAIR assessment periods (predictive |
|
validity)?; and (2) How much does adding the FAIR reading |
|
comprehension screen affect identification errors beyond |
|
those identified through 2011 FCAT 2.0 scores (screening |
|
accuracy)? Performance on the 2012 FCAT 2.0 was found to |
|
have a stronger correlation with FCAT success probability |
|
scores than with FAIR reading comprehension ability |
|
scores. In addition, using 2011 FCAT 2.0 scores alone to |
|
predict 2012 FCAT 2.0 scores underidentified 16-24 |
|
percent of students as at risk. Adding FAIR reading |
|
comprehension ability scores dropped the |
|
underidentification rate by 12-20 percentage points. An |
|
appendix provides additional statistics. (Contains 10 |
|
tables, 1 box, and 3 notes.) [This report was prepared |
|
for the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) by Regional |
|
Educational Laboratory Southeast administered by Florida |
|
Center for Reading Research, Florida State University.] |
|
|
|
Date Published: 2016-03-29 11:38:46 |
|
Identifier: ERIC_ED544195 |
|
Item Size: 27460624 |
|
Language: english |
|
Media Type: texts |
|
|
|
# Topics |
|
ERIC Archive; Reading Comprehension; ... |
|
|
|
# Collections |
|
ericarchive |
|
additional_collections |
|
|
|
# Uploaded by |
|
@chris85 |
|
|
|
# Similar Items |
|
View similar items |
|
|
|
PHAROS |
|
