This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Klingner, J. K. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Assessing Reading Comprehension

University of Colorado at Boulder

Generally, experts agree on what good readers do to comprehend text—they connect new text with past experiences, interpret, evaluate, synthesize, and consider alternative interpretations. Yet, traditional measures of reading comprehension only provide a general indicator of how well a student understands text. They do not provide information about how the student uses cognitive and metacognitive processes or explain why a student may be struggling. This article discusses various traditional and innovative reading comprehension assessment measures, including standardized norm-referenced tests, informal reading inventories, interviews and questionnaires, anecdotal records and observations, oral retelling, freewriting, and think-aloud procedures. For each technique relative strengths and weaknesses are described.

Assessment for Effective Intervention, Vol. 29, No. 4, 59-70 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/073724770402900408


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?