Examining Differential Boost from Read Aloud on a Test of Reading Comprehension at Grades 4 and 8

Cara Cahalan-LaitusisLinda CookFred ClineTeresa King

Accommodation vs. Modification

• States are not in agreement on read aloud on reading tests

• Many students use read aloud even when “not allowed” by the state– In California nearly 4,000 fourth graders took

the STAR English Language Arts assessment in 2004 with the test read aloud

• Schools are torn between complying with state policy to not allow read aloud and federal regulations to allow all accommodations used in the classroom

Differential Boost

Example of Differential Boost

0

LD Non-LD

Avera

ge T

est S

core

Standard

Audio

Prior Research

• No Differential Boost– Kosciokek & Ysseldyke (2000). Small sample size

(n=31)– Meloy, Deville, and Frisbie (2002) – Between

subjects design (n=260, 76% non-disabled, random assigned to audio or standard)

– McKevitt & Elliott (2003) Small sample size (n=39)

• Differential Boost– Crawford and Tindal (2004) (n=338, 78% non-

disabled)– Fletcher, et. al (2006) Between subjects design

(random assigned to audio or standard) and sample included 91 Dyslexic (poor decoder) and 91 average decoders

Differential Boost Design

Session 1 Session 2

Group N* Booklet Accommodation Booklet Accommodation

1 350 A Standard B Audio

2 350 A Audio B Standard

3 350 B Audio A Standard

4 350 B Standard A Audio

Total 1400

Data Collected

• 2 Reading Comprehension Tests– Extra Time– Extra Time with Read Aloud via CD

• 2 Fluency Measures• 2 Decoding Measures (4th grade only)• Student Survey• Teacher Survey

Sample

• 1170 4th Graders– 522 Students with RLD– 648 Students without a disability

• 855 8th Graders– 394 Students with RLD– 461 Students without a disability

Mean Scale Score and Boost

  RLD Non-LD

Grade 4 Standard 457 497

Audio 477 502

Boost 20 5 

Grade 8 Standard 511 552

Audio 521 554

Boost 10 2

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

RLDGrade 4

Not LDGrade 4

RLDGrade 8

Not LDGrade 8

Standard

Audio

Teacher Prediction

Student Prediction

Preliminary Findings

• Differential Boost at both 4th and 8th grades (i.e., students with LD had significantly greater score gains from read aloud than non-LD students)

• Differential Boost (at both grades) even after controlling for Reading Fluency

Additional Analyses Planned

• Examine if controlling for decoding and fluency result in differential boost

• Differential Item Functioning between groups

• Examine which variables (decoding, fluency, teacher ratings, student ratings) best predict boost from audio

Additional Analyses Planned

• Predictive Validity of test scores – Compute regression equation for non-

RLD standard score to other measure of RC (e.g., teacher ratings, state test scores, and/or fluency measure

– Examine over/under estimations of non-LD audio, RLD audio, and RLD standard