Development of a new reading comprehension assessment: Identifying comprehension differences among readers

Sarah E. Carlson; Ben Seipel; Kristen McMaster

doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2014.03.003

Development of a new reading comprehension assessment: Identifying comprehension differences among readers

Sarah E. Carlson, Ben Seipel, Kristen McMaster

Educational Psychology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

37 Scopus citations

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Multiple-choice Online Cloze Comprehension Assessment (MOCCA), designed to identify individual differences in reading comprehension. Data were collected with two sets of 3rd through 5th grade students during two years: 92 students participated in Year 1 and 98 students participated in Year 2 to address primary research questions, and an additional 94 (N= 192) students participated in Year 2 to address the limitation of test administration time. Participants were group administered the MOCCA and a standardized reading proficiency assessment, and individually administered other reading measures. Preliminary analyses indicated that the MOCCA produced reliable and valid scores as a new reading comprehension assessment for identifying types of comprehension processes used during reading, as well as for identifying individual differences in the types of comprehension processes used during reading. Findings are discussed in terms of developing a new measure to identify cognitive reading comprehension processes used during reading. Future research is needed to provide additional support for the technical adequacy of the assessment.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	40-53
Number of pages	14
Journal	Learning and Individual Differences
Volume	32
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.03.003
State	Published - May 2014

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This research was supported by Grant # R305C050059 from the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), U.S. Department of Education, to the University of Minnesota and through the Interdisciplinary Education Sciences Predoctoral Training Program, “Minnesota Interdisciplinary Training in Education Sciences (MITER)” for data collection and resources, as well as by Grant # R305b110012 from the IES , U.S. Department of Education, to the Center on Teaching and Learning at the University of Oregon, through a Postdoctoral Fellowship for writing resources. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent views of the IES or the U.S. Department of Education.

Keywords

Individual differences
Reading comprehension assessment
Reading comprehension processes

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access

10.1016/j.lindif.2014.03.003

OpenUrl availability

Full text

Cite this

@article{46bbfdec82634843baeb5bdaf0c93601,

title = "Development of a new reading comprehension assessment: Identifying comprehension differences among readers",

abstract = "The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Multiple-choice Online Cloze Comprehension Assessment (MOCCA), designed to identify individual differences in reading comprehension. Data were collected with two sets of 3rd through 5th grade students during two years: 92 students participated in Year 1 and 98 students participated in Year 2 to address primary research questions, and an additional 94 (N= 192) students participated in Year 2 to address the limitation of test administration time. Participants were group administered the MOCCA and a standardized reading proficiency assessment, and individually administered other reading measures. Preliminary analyses indicated that the MOCCA produced reliable and valid scores as a new reading comprehension assessment for identifying types of comprehension processes used during reading, as well as for identifying individual differences in the types of comprehension processes used during reading. Findings are discussed in terms of developing a new measure to identify cognitive reading comprehension processes used during reading. Future research is needed to provide additional support for the technical adequacy of the assessment.",

keywords = "Individual differences, Reading comprehension assessment, Reading comprehension processes",

author = "Carlson, {Sarah E.} and Ben Seipel and Kristen McMaster",

note = "Funding Information: This research was supported by Grant # R305C050059 from the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), U.S. Department of Education, to the University of Minnesota and through the Interdisciplinary Education Sciences Predoctoral Training Program, “Minnesota Interdisciplinary Training in Education Sciences (MITER)” for data collection and resources, as well as by Grant # R305b110012 from the IES , U.S. Department of Education, to the Center on Teaching and Learning at the University of Oregon, through a Postdoctoral Fellowship for writing resources. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent views of the IES or the U.S. Department of Education. ",

year = "2014",

month = may,

doi = "10.1016/j.lindif.2014.03.003",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "32",

pages = "40--53",

journal = "Learning and Individual Differences",

issn = "1041-6080",

publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Development of a new reading comprehension assessment

T2 - Identifying comprehension differences among readers

AU - Carlson, Sarah E.

AU - Seipel, Ben

AU - McMaster, Kristen

N1 - Funding Information: This research was supported by Grant # R305C050059 from the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), U.S. Department of Education, to the University of Minnesota and through the Interdisciplinary Education Sciences Predoctoral Training Program, “Minnesota Interdisciplinary Training in Education Sciences (MITER)” for data collection and resources, as well as by Grant # R305b110012 from the IES , U.S. Department of Education, to the Center on Teaching and Learning at the University of Oregon, through a Postdoctoral Fellowship for writing resources. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent views of the IES or the U.S. Department of Education.

PY - 2014/5

Y1 - 2014/5

N2 - The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Multiple-choice Online Cloze Comprehension Assessment (MOCCA), designed to identify individual differences in reading comprehension. Data were collected with two sets of 3rd through 5th grade students during two years: 92 students participated in Year 1 and 98 students participated in Year 2 to address primary research questions, and an additional 94 (N= 192) students participated in Year 2 to address the limitation of test administration time. Participants were group administered the MOCCA and a standardized reading proficiency assessment, and individually administered other reading measures. Preliminary analyses indicated that the MOCCA produced reliable and valid scores as a new reading comprehension assessment for identifying types of comprehension processes used during reading, as well as for identifying individual differences in the types of comprehension processes used during reading. Findings are discussed in terms of developing a new measure to identify cognitive reading comprehension processes used during reading. Future research is needed to provide additional support for the technical adequacy of the assessment.

AB - The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Multiple-choice Online Cloze Comprehension Assessment (MOCCA), designed to identify individual differences in reading comprehension. Data were collected with two sets of 3rd through 5th grade students during two years: 92 students participated in Year 1 and 98 students participated in Year 2 to address primary research questions, and an additional 94 (N= 192) students participated in Year 2 to address the limitation of test administration time. Participants were group administered the MOCCA and a standardized reading proficiency assessment, and individually administered other reading measures. Preliminary analyses indicated that the MOCCA produced reliable and valid scores as a new reading comprehension assessment for identifying types of comprehension processes used during reading, as well as for identifying individual differences in the types of comprehension processes used during reading. Findings are discussed in terms of developing a new measure to identify cognitive reading comprehension processes used during reading. Future research is needed to provide additional support for the technical adequacy of the assessment.

KW - Individual differences

KW - Reading comprehension assessment

KW - Reading comprehension processes

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84898825950&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84898825950&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.lindif.2014.03.003

DO - 10.1016/j.lindif.2014.03.003

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84898825950

SN - 1041-6080

VL - 32

SP - 40

EP - 53

JO - Learning and Individual Differences

JF - Learning and Individual Differences

ER -

Development of a new reading comprehension assessment: Identifying comprehension differences among readers

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access

OpenUrl availability

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this