Assessing Fluency

An Evaluation of Rasinski's Fluency Assessment

Jill Marie Napert School of Education, Roger Williams University February 27, 2013

What is Fluency?
Rasinski (2004) defines fluency as "the reader's ability to develop control over surface-level text processing so that he or she can focus on understanding the deeper levels of meaning embedded in the text." It is "the bridge from phonics to comprehension" (Rasinski & Samuels, 2011). "Fluency is not fast reading... reading rate may be highly correlated with reading comprehension, but correlation does not imply causation" (Rasinski & Samuels, 2011).

The Three Dimensions of Fluency

Accuracy in word decoding: the ability to sound out words with minimal errors. Automatic processing (automaticity): the ability to use little to no mental effort for decoding in order to attend to meaning while reading. Prosody: the ability to read with expression, attending to punctuation and phrasing.

Assessment Overview

Process-oriented (assess skills as they are being demonstrated) Formative Flexible (teacher decides timing and frequency) Appropropriate for all grade/reading levels Useful in monitoring student progress, as well as identifying students who are struggling Information relevant for all stakeholders including teachers, specialists, parents and students.

Procedural Overview
1. Student orally reads 100-200 word passage (at approximate grade level). 2. Teacher records data in each of the three dimensions. 3. Teacher determines next steps for instruction.

Assessing Accuracy

Proficient accuracy: student makes no more than 10 decoding errors per 100 words.
Number of Words Correct ------------------------------- X 100 = Accuracy Rate Number of Words Read Proficient = 90% or higher

Assessing Automaticity
Adapted from Rasinski, 2010.

Proficient automaticity (reading rate): student reads words correct per minute (WCPM) within range of target rate at grade level.
Fluency Norms, Grade:
1 2 3 4

Fall
--30-80 50-110 70-120

Winter
--50-100 70-120 80-130

Spring
30-90 WCPM 70-130 80-140 90-140

5
6 7 8

80-130
90-140 100-150 110-160

90-140
100-150 110-160 120-180

100-150
110-160 120-170 130-180

Adapted from Rasinski, 2004

Assessing Prosody
Phrasing
Good phrasing, mostly in clause and sentence units, with adequate attention to expression.

Proficient prosody: student scores >8 on fluency rubric.

Expression 4
Good expression, enthusiasm throughout. Varies expression and volume to match interpretation of the passage

Smoothness
Generally smooth with some breaks, resolves word and structure difficulties quickly, usually through self-correction.

Pace
Consistently reads at conversational pace; appropriate reading rate throughout.

Makes text sound like natural language throughout better part of passage. Occasional slip into expressionless reading. Voice volume generally appropriate. Begins to use voice to make text sound like natural language in some areas of text, but not in others. Focus remains largely on pronouncing words. Still reads in a quiet voice. Reads words simply to get them out. Little sense of trying to make text sound like natural language. Tends to read in a quiet voice.

Mixture of run-ons. midsentence pauses for breath, some choppiness; reasonable stress intonation.

Occasionally breaks smooth rhythm because of difficulties with specific words and/or structures.

Reads with uneven mixture of fast and slow pace.

Frequently reads in two-and three-word phrases, giving impression of choppy reading; improper stress and intonation fail to mark ends of sentences and clauses.

Experiences several "rough spots" in text where extended pauses or hesitations are more frequent and disruptive.

Reads moderately slowly.

Reads in monotone with little sense of phrase boundaries; frequently reads word-byword.

Makes frequent extended pauses, hesitations, false starts, sound-outs, repetitions, and/or multiple attempts.

Reads slowly and laboriously.

Sample Assessment
Marquis Accuracy: 98 correct words/100 words = 98% Automaticity: 63 words read in 60 seconds. Falls within range of 50-100 words. Prosody: Expression 2 + Phrasing 3 + Smoothness 3 + Pace 1 = 9

Discussion of Results

Great job decoding! Text too easy? Knowledge of my student since September... Scores within range (towards the lower end) of grade-level norms for automaticity. Just slightly over minimum for proficiency in prosody. Plenty of room for improvement...

Implications for Instruction

Focus on area where student is most in need.

Accuracy and automaticity = decoding skills, phonics o Prosody = assisted readings and repeated readings: students need to be exposed to many examples of fluent reading. Teacher models with read alouds and think alouds.
o

Provide student with many opportunities to practice. Provide coaching: I liked how you use pauses when you see a comma or at the end of a sentence with a period. How do you think you can make a question sound different?

Aligned with best practices?

Authentic? Measures student performance on relevant tasks? Reliable? Data that remains "essentially unchanged if collected on a different day by a different person." Valid? "Data adequately represents the tasks children need to accomplish to be successful (Gambrell, Malloy, & Mazzoni, 2011) readers."

Aligned with best practices?

NCTE/IRA Standards:

The interests of the student are paramount in assessment The teacher is the most important agent of assessment The primary purpose of assessment is to improve teaching and learning Assessment must reflect and allow for critical inquiry into curriculum and instruction Assessment must be fair and equitable
(IRA, 2010)

Aligned with best practices?

Literacy assessment belongs in the hands of those whose lives are affected by it- students and teachers" (Valencia, McGinley & Pearson, 1990; Tierney, Carter & Desai, 1991). Assessment should be a cooperative effort between the student and teacher (Paratore & Indrisano, 1987; Tierney, Carter & Desai, 1991; Valencia, McGinley & Pearson, 1990). Literacy Assessment should attempt to assess the processes of literacy (Johnston, 1984; Paratore & Indrisano, 1987; Wade, 1990). Literacy assessment should take place within the context of real classrooms using authentic tasks and materials (Paratore & Indrisano, 1987; Valencia, McGinley & Pearson, Wade, 1990).

References
Gambrell, L., Malloy, J., & Mazzoni, S. (2011). Evidence-based best practices in comprehensive literacy instruction. In L. Morrow & L. Gambrell (Eds.) Best practices in literacy instruction

(pp. 11-33). New York: Guilford.

Rasinski, T. (2010). The Fluent Reader. New York: Scholastic. Rasinski, T. (2004). Creating Fluent Readers. Educational Leadership (pp. 46-51). Rasinski, T., & Samuels, S. (2011) Reading fluency: What it is and what it is not. In S. Samuels & A. Farstrup (Eds.) What research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 94-114). Newark: International Reading Association.