69传媒

Just a few years ago, a set of tests known as 鈥渄ibbles鈥� would have elicited little more than a chuckle from educators or anyone else. Today, they鈥檙e taking it seriously, because the acronym DIBELS has come to symbolize the standard for early-literacy assessment throughout much of the country.

Teachers in 69传媒 First schools in more than 40 states now use the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills to screen K-3 pupils for potential reading problems and to monitor their progress. And state officials are collecting the data from the short reading-fluency tests to determine whether schools receiving some of the $1 billion given annually in federal 69传媒 First grants are making adequate progress in getting students up to grade-level proficiency.

Several states have gone so far as to adopt the assessments for all schools to use regularly.

Seen as Reliable

Developed by researchers at the University of Oregon, DIBELS has become a catchphrase in the schoolhouse and the statehouse as officials look to test data to inform instruction, to identify children at risk of failure in reading, and to hold schools accountable for student achievement.

But while teachers, administrators, and researchers praise the tests for their ease of use and reliability in predicting which children may have reading difficulties later, the use of DIBELS has drawn criticism from some in the field. Critics cite the tendency of some educators to teach to the tests or give the measures too much weight in gauging reading ability, as well as the often-aggressive promotion of DIBELS by federal employees and consultants to the 69传媒 First program.

鈥淚f you want a test of whether kids can read fast with low comprehension, then DIBELS is great,鈥� said G. Michael Pressley, a professor of education at Michigan State University in East Lansing and a former editor of the Journal of Educational Psychology. 鈥淚t is not as well developed as the claims that are being made.鈥�

DIBELS has become the de facto national assessment for 69传媒 First over the last three years, with the tests鈥� use in most of the 4,800 schools in the program and a number of other schools. 69传媒 First, adopted under the No Child Left Behind Act, authorized $6 billion over six years to implement strongly skills-based reading instruction in the nation鈥檚 struggling schools.

Although the total number of schools using the tests is unknown, more than 8,200 schools in 2,600 districts have signed up for the associated data-management system offered by the University of Oregon at a cost of $1 per student.

DIBELS has become widely used because 鈥渋t is pretty darn good,鈥� Roland H. Good III, who developed the tests with Ruth A. Kaminski, wrote in an e-mail message to Education Week.

鈥淒IBELS is a reliable and valid measurement tool鈥�that helps teachers make decisions to change reading outcomes for students,鈥� he wrote. 鈥淚t is also very efficient to use and requires modest resources to implement.鈥�

鈥楲ol鈥� and 鈥楾ob鈥�

DIBELS measures such skills as letter naming, recognizing the sounds of each letter, sounding out words, and read-aloud fluency. Its appeal is that the tests are 鈥渂rief, replicable, and relatively easy to administer,鈥� said Natalie Rathvon, a Bethesda, Md.-based consultant and the author of Early 69传媒 Assessment: A Practitioner鈥檚 Handbook. 鈥淒IBELS is great for testing those foundational skills.鈥�

The tests for K-6 cover a range of tasks and include benchmarks for determining whether pupils are on grade level or at risk of problems with reading. On the test of letter-naming fluency for kindergartners, for example, youngsters are asked to identify as many randomly listed uppercase and lowercase letters as they can in one minute.

On the nonsense-word-fluency test, K-2 pupils must decode pseudo-words, such as 鈥渓ol鈥� or 鈥渢ob,鈥� as quickly as they can for one minute, a measure intended to gauge how well they know the letter sounds. First, 2nd, and 3rd graders are also given a test of their oral-reading fluency, which measures how many words in a given text passage they can read accurately in a minute.

At Spencer Math and Science Academy in Chicago last week, Rachel Woodrick, the 69传媒 First coach, was in the midst of testing 3rd graders on how well they could read DIBELS passages. After spending a few minutes with each student, she entered the scores into a hand-held computer and received feedback on how each child measured up to the desired standard.

鈥淥nce you learn to do the test it鈥檚 really easy to do 鈥� and it gives me a fast result,鈥� she said. 鈥淎nd the test does not push [the children] to an extreme frustration level鈥� if they are struggling with their reading.

The battery of tests was not the first choice for Illinois and some states applying for the federal money. In fact, a number of states had intended to use other assessments for screening children and gauging progress in 69传媒 First schools. They changed their plans, they maintain, after federal officials and consultants pressured them to include DIBELS in their grant proposal as a condition for approval. Federal officials deny those charges. (鈥淪tates Pressed to Refashion 69传媒 First Grant Designs,鈥� Sept. 7, 2005.)

Still, observers say that DIBELS, which was in use years before the 69传媒 First initiative, may have seemed the best fit for 69传媒 First schools because the tests are quick and yield information about aptitude on a range of reading tasks. They were also designed around the same research on effective reading instruction that guides the federal initiative, Mr. Good said.

鈥淚t is not a coincidence 鈥� that the structure of our work corresponds so closely to 69传媒 First and the National 69传媒 Panel report,鈥� the influential research review released in 2000, Mr. Good wrote. 鈥淲e were all reading the same research and committed to following the evidence and the data.鈥�

Competitive Edge

Some states were able to make a case for other tests. In Virginia, for example, 69传媒 First schools use the Phonological Awareness Literacy Screening tests, or PALS. That system, developed by researchers at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, has been the early-literacy assessment in that state since 1997 and is used by schools and districts in more than 40 other states as well.

Virginia was able to make its case for using the test in 69传媒 First schools based on its use in nearly all of the state鈥檚 135 school districts over the last 8 years. Several other states also initially chose PALS as their evaluation instrument. But federal reviewers, who questioned the validity and reliability of the tests, repeatedly returned those proposals. Marcia Invernizzi, the director of PALS, calls the federal claims 鈥渙utrageous.鈥�

鈥淚 would pit PALS鈥� validity and reliability studies against any 69传媒 First assessment,鈥� she said. 鈥淒IBELS is a terrific assessment tool, 鈥� but it lacks the instructional transparence and utility that teachers need.鈥�

Ms. Rathvon, the Maryland-based consultant, agrees. While DIBELS provides good assessment tools, it is 鈥渁 work in progress,鈥� she writes in her book. Nor does it give teachers clear answers for designing instruction around students鈥� needs. For example, PALS pinpoints if a 2nd grader is reading at a level expected of a mid-year 1st grader, while DIBELS determines only if a pupil does or does not measure up to the benchmarks set for his or her own grade level.

The Virginia test system, however, was not included in a federally commissioned expert review of research-based early-literacy assessments that met 69传媒 First requirements, although Ms. Invernizzi said she twice submitted the materials.

Only a few states were able to get tests other than DIBELS, such as the Developmental 69传媒 Assessment and the Texas Primary 69传媒 Inventory, approved under 69传媒 First.

Some critics charge that DIBELS got the competitive edge not because of its superiority, but because its developers and their colleagues at the University of Oregon, located in Eugene, were key consultants to the U.S. Department of Education for 69传媒 First. Mr. Good was on the assessment committee that evaluated 29 early-literacy tests, including DIBELS, his own product. That list was provided as a resource to states for drafting their 69传媒 First plans.

Related Products

While the tests are free for download, slick, packaged sets and related products are sold by Sopris West, a Longmont, Colo.-based company that sells instructional materials and assessments and offers teacher training. The data-management program has been licensed to Wireless Generation, a New York City-based company selling hand-held computers to schools for assessment and data management.

States and districts have also paid for training sessions. Mr. Good said his influence on 69传媒 First 鈥渉as been negligible鈥� and credits other researchers with guiding the federal initiative.

Some of the harshest criticism is aimed at the test content itself. Some researchers question whether children鈥檚 speed at reading nonsense words or carefully crafted passages has anything to do with the ultimate goal of comprehension, according to P. David Pearson, the dean of education at the University of California, Berkeley. Moreover, Mr. Pearson said, the assessment measures have not been studied adequately enough to support its widespread use in 69传媒 First.

Research has shown that students鈥� ability to decode nonsense words, and their speed in reading grade-level passages, are valid and reliable predictors of whether they will have reading difficulties later on, according to Ms. Rathvon.

Even so, some researchers argue that DIBELS鈥� reliability and its usefulness to teachers is questionable.

Michigan State鈥檚 Mr. Pressley is completing a technical report on DIBELS. So far, he said, his analysis shows that it is an accurate indicator of how pupils will perform on high-stakes state tests in reading. But DIBELS does not show whether students are on target for developing higher-level reading skills, such as vocabulary and comprehension.

鈥淭hese [tested skills] become your end goal,鈥� Mr. Pressley said. 鈥淒IBELS is leading some teachers to infer the wrong end goal, which is to read the words fast.鈥�