The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reading Fluency Assessment and Instruction: What, Why, and How?
Abstract
This article explains the elements of reading fluency and ways to assess and teach them. Fluent reading has three elements: accurate reading of connected text, at a conversational rate with appropriate prosody. Word reading accuracy refers to the ability to recognize or decode words correctly. Reading rate refers to both word-level automaticity and speed in reading text. Prosodic features are variations in pitch, stress patterns, and duration that contribute to expressive reading of a text. To assess reading fluency, including all its aspects, teachers listen to students read aloud. Students' accuracy can be measured by listening to oral reading and counting the number of errors per 100 words or a running record. Measuring reading rate includes both word-reading automaticity and speed in reading connected text using tests of sight-word knowledge and timed readings. A student's reading prosody can be measured using a checklist while listening to the student. To provide instruction in rate and accuracy, variations on the repeated readings technique are useful. To develop prosody, readers can listen to fluent models and engage in activities focused on expression and meaning. Opportunities to develop all areas of reading fluency are important for all readers, but especially for those who struggle.
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
(1991) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.28-5764 · Cited by 6,847
Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children
(1998) · National Academies Press eBooks · doi:10.17226/6023 · Cited by 5,337
Beginning to Read: Thinking and Learning about Print
Cairns, C., & Adams, M. J. (1991) · Language · doi:10.2307/415121 · Cited by 4,376
Langenberg, D. N. (2000) · Cited by 4,305
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
Beginning to read: thinking and learning about print
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.28-1069 · Cited by 2,521
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Jenkins, J. R. (2001) · Scientific Studies of Reading · doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr0503_3 · Cited by 1,525
Fluency: A review of developmental and remedial practices.
Kuhn, M. R., & Stahl, S. A. (2003) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.3 · Cited by 1,124
What Research Has to Say About Reading Instruction
(2011) · International Reading Association eBooks · doi:10.1598/0829 · Cited by 1,090
Torgesen, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Voeller, K. K. S., & Conway, T. (2001) · Journal of Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1177/002221940103400104 · Cited by 980
Cited by
Oral Reading Fluency Norms: A Valuable Assessment Tool for Reading Teachers
Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. A. (2006) · The Reading Teacher · doi:10.1598/rt.59.7.3 · Cited by 566
Saine, N. L., Lerkkanen, M.-K., Ahonen, T., Tolvanen, A., & Lyytinen, H. (2010) · Learning and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2010.06.004 · Cited by 99
Metadata
- Authors
- Hudson, R. F., Lane, H. B., & Pullen, P. C.
- Venue
- The Reading Teacher
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-05
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 702-714
- ISSN
- 0034-0561 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2088974308
- Cited by
- 527
- References
- 54
- FWCI
- 16.08
- 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: Reading Fluency Assessment and Instruction: What, Why, and How? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1598/rt.58.8.1
- The paper
- Hudson, R. F., Lane, H. B., & Pullen, P. C. (2005). Reading Fluency Assessment and Instruction: What, Why, and How? The Reading Teacher. https://doi.org/10.1598/rt.58.8.1
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.