The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Curriculum-Based Measurement of Oral Reading Fluency: A Confirmatory Analysis of its Relation to Reading
Abstract
Reading traditionally is characterized as having two major components, decoding and comprehension. Published reading tests are created using these two components. Reading fluency, a combination of reading speed and accuracy, typically is not measured. Attention to reading fluency has increased through the emerging literature on Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM), which employs standardized oral reading tests derived from basal readers to make decisions about students' general reading skills. Despite a series of published validation studies, questions about what CBM oral reading fluency measures persist. This study examined the relation of CBM oral reading fluency to the reading process from a theoretical perspective. Reading models were tested using confirmatory factor analysis procedures with 114 third-and 124 fifth-grade students. Subjects were tested on tasks requiring decoding of phonetically regular words and regular nonsense words, literal comprehension, inferential comprehension, cloze items, written retell, and CBM oral reading fluency. For third graders, a unitary model of reading was validated with all measures contributing significantly. For fifth graders, a two-factor model was validated paralleling current conceptions of reading measurement. Regardless of the factor model employed, CBM oral reading fluency provided a good index of reading proficiency, including comprehension.
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
Cites
Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.88.3.588 · Cited by 19,023
Stanovich, K. E. (1986) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.1598/rrq.21.4.1 · Cited by 5,222
Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading
LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(74)90015-2 · Cited by 3,841
Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size.
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.103.3.391 · Cited by 3,824
Beginning to read: thinking and learning about print
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.28-1069 · Cited by 2,521
Chall, J. S. (1983) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,739
Curriculum-Based Measurement: The Emerging Alternative
Deno, S. L. (1985) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/001440298505200303 · Cited by 1,667
Long, J. (1983) · Sage eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781412983778 · Cited by 1,511
Humphreys, L. G., & Lindquist, E. F. (1952) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1418848 · Cited by 1,502
(2012) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.1002/(issn)1936-2722 · Cited by 1,375
Cited by
Chard, D. J., Vaughn, S., & Tyler, B.-J. (2002) · Journal of Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1177/00222194020350050101 · Cited by 608
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
Literature 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
Denton, C. A., Barth, A. E., Fletcher, J. M., Wexler, J., Vaughn, S., Cirino, P. T., Romain, M., & Francis, D. J. (2011) · Scientific Studies of Reading · doi:10.1080/10888431003623546 · Cited by 140
Metadata
- Authors
- Shinn, M. R., Knutson, N., Good, R. H., Tilly, W. D., & Collins, V. L.
- Venue
- School Psychology Review
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1992-09-01
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 459-479
- ISSN
- 0279-6015 (ISSN-L)
- 2372-966X
- OpenAlex
- W2731366863
- Cited by
- 336
- References
- 42
- FWCI
- 5.59
- 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: Curriculum-Based Measurement of Oral Reading Fluency: A Confirmatory Analysis of its Relation to Reading. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/02796015.1992.12085629
- The paper
- Shinn, M. R., Knutson, N., Good, R. H., Tilly, W. D., & Collins, V. L. (1992). Curriculum-Based Measurement of Oral Reading Fluency: A Confirmatory Analysis of its Relation to Reading. School Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.1992.12085629
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.