The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Identifying a Measure for Monitoring Student Reading Progress
Abstract
Based on a decade of research, oral reading fluency has been identified as the standard task for monitoring reading progress within Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM). Although a technically sound and useful measure for monitoring growth, collecting reading fluency on a routine basis can be time-consuming for teachers. Moreover, its acceptability as an index of comprehension has been questioned. Consequently, we have conducted a research program investigating alternative reading monitoring measures. The measures share two features: They are suitable for automatic data collection and scoring using computers, and they appear acceptable as measures of reading comprehension. In this research program, the criterion validity of four reading measures was assessed. Based on results, a subset of measures was identified and their usefulness and technical features were studied as ongoing measures of reading progress over a series of years. In this article, this research program is summarized and recommendations are offered for alternative CBM reading monitoring systems and future investigation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Reading Fluency Assessment and Instruction: What, Why, and How?
Hudson, R. F., Lane, H. B., & Pullen, P. C. (2005) · The Reading Teacher · doi:10.1598/rt.58.8.1 · Cited by 527
Formative Evaluation of Academic Progress: How Much Growth Can We Expect?
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Walz, L., & Germann, G. (1993) · School Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/02796015.1993.12085636 · Cited by 442
Self-citationLiterature Synthesis on Curriculum-Based Measurement in Reading
Miura Wayman, M., Wallace, T., Wiley, H. I., Tichá, R., & Espin, C. A. (2007) · The Journal of Special Education · doi:10.1177/00224669070410020401 · Cited by 428
Deno, S. L., Fuchs, L. S., Marston, D., & Shin, J. (2001) · School Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/02796015.2001.12086131 · Cited by 405
Self-citationTechnical Adequacy of the Maze Task for Curriculum-Based Measurement of Reading Growth
Shin, J., Deno, S. L., & Espin, C. (2000) · The Journal of Special Education · doi:10.1177/002246690003400305 · Cited by 192
Metadata
- Authors
- Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D.
- Venue
- School Psychology Review
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1992-03-01
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 45-58
- ISSN
- 0279-6015 (ISSN-L)
- 2372-966X
- OpenAlex
- W1484386892
- Cited by
- 235
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Identifying a Measure for Monitoring Student Reading Progress. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/02796015.1992.12085594
- The paper
- Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1992). Identifying a Measure for Monitoring Student Reading Progress. School Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.1992.12085594
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.