Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 336

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

Shinn, Mark R., Knutson, Nancy, Good, Roland H., Tilly, W. David, Collins, Vicki L.·1992·School Psychology Review

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02796015.1992.12085629

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 42 references

Cited by

See all 336

Metadata

Authors
Shinn, M. R., Knutson, N., Good, R. H., Tilly, W. D., & Collins, V. L.
Venue
School Psychology Review
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.