Introduction to Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills *DIBELS* Massachusetts Reading First Teacher Reading Academy William J. Matthews, Ph.D. University of Massachusetts School Psychology Program shamrock@educ.umass.edu 413-545-1192 Christopher Parker, Ph.D. IDEAL Consulting Services, Inc. (508) 636-6615 (866) 254-6136 cparker@idealconsultingservices.com www.idealconsultingservices.com Increasingly Large Numbers of Students Possess Reading Problems A minimum of two million children in the United States have substantial difficulties in reading. Approximately one out of every six children will encounter reading difficulties during the crucial first 3 years of school. Children who read poorly at the end of their first year of reading instruction are likely to continue to experience difficulty in reading throughout their educational careers. Out of the 3.8 million 18-year old Americans in 1988...700,000 could not read their high school diplomas. (Adams, 1990; Clay, 1979; Juel, 1988; Lundberg, 1984; National Center to Improve the Tools for Educators, 1996; National Research Council, 1998) Can we do better? From G. R. Lyon (2004) The critical role of scientific research in teaching children, empowering teachers, and moving beyond the “either-or box.” Why change the Assessment System in Massachusetts? A Preventive Approach to Reading Problems in Young Children The most parsimonious and sensible way to remediate the reading difficulties of young children is to prevent these problems from occurring in the first place. (Johnston & Allington, 1991) Prevention Requires Quality Assessment Tools Tools that identify children early on who are failing to acquire the core components that are essential to reading success. Tools that allow for ongoing evaluation of the effectiveness of interventions for individual children. (Kaminski & Good, 1996) Five Core Componentsthat are Essential to Reading Success 1.Phonemic Awareness 2.Phonics 3.Fluency 4.Comprehension 5.Vocabulary (National Reading Panel, 2000) Features of DIBELS Dynamic Indicators Standardized Measurement Procedures Technically adequate Short-Duration, Fluency Measures Inexpensive Multiple Forms Production-Type Responses Work well within a Formative Evaluation Framework (Deno, 1985; 1992; Kaminski & Good, 1998) DIBELS are Designed to Function as Educational Thermometers Directions: Here are some letters (point to the student probe). Tell me the names of as many letters as you can. When I say, "begin", start here (point to first letter) and go across the page (point). Point to each letter and tell me the name of that letter. If you come to a letter you don't know I'll tell it to you. Do you have any questions about what we are going to do? Put your finger on the first letter. Ready, begin. Letter Naming Fluency Initial Sound Fluency Directions: l am going to say a word. After I say it, you tell me all the sounds in the word. So, if I say, "sam," you would say /s/ /a/ /m/. Let's try one. (one second pause) Tell me the sounds in “mop.” DIBELS Benchmark Testing: Measurement Net Summarize Data & Examine Results for Schools at the District Level Summarize Data & Examine Results for Schools at the State Level Text Box: Sample Public Schools – Sample Elementary School Comparative Performance to District Composite: Spring 2002-2003 Grade 1 – Oral Reading Fluency Summarize Data & Examine Results for Schools at the National Level Summarize Data & Examine Results for Schools: Growth Trajectories Summarize Data & Examine Results for Individual Students Three-Tier Intervention Model Summarize Data & Examine the Effectiveness of Interventions Regularly Monitor the Effects of Interventions for Individual Students Second Grade-Oral Reading Fluency Pulling It All Together: Schoolwide Reading Improvement Model Leadership Support Professional Development References Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print.Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press. Clay, M. M. (1979). Reading: The patterning of complex behaviour.Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann. Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative.Exceptional Children, 52,217-232. Deno, S. L. (1992). The nature and development of curriculum-based measurement. Preventing School Failure, 36(2),5-10. Kaminski, R. A., & Good, R. H. (1996). Toward a technology for assessing basic early literacy skills. School Psychology Review, 25(2),215-227. Kaminski, R. A., & Good, R. H. (1998). Assessing early literacy skills in a Problem-Solving Model: Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills. In. M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Advanced Applications of Curriculum-Based Measurement(pp. 113-142). New York: Guilford Press. Johnston, P., & Allington, R. (1991). Remediation. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research(Vol. II, pp. 984-1012). New York: Logman. Juel, C. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of fifty-four children from first through fourth grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80,437-447. Lundberg, I. (1984, August). Learning to read. School Research Newsletter. National Board of Education, Sweden. Salvia, J., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (1995). Assessment (6th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Shinn, M. R. (1989). Curriculum-Based Measurement: Assessing Special Children.New York: Guilford Press. Shinn, M. R., & McConnell, S. (1994). Improving general education instruction: Relevance to school psychology. School Psychology Review, 23(3), 351-371. © IDEAL Consulting Services, Inc. 2003-2004