Lessons Learned from Research about Informal Reading Inventories: Keys to Data-Driven Instructional Recommendations
Saved in:
| Title: | Lessons Learned from Research about Informal Reading Inventories: Keys to Data-Driven Instructional Recommendations |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | L'Allier, Susan K. |
| Source: | Reading & Writing Quarterly. 2013 29(3):288-307. |
| Availability: | Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 20 |
| Publication Date: | 2013 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Informal Reading Inventories, Data, Decision Making, Reading Instruction, Graduate Students, Teacher Education, Literacy Education, Expertise, Comparative Analysis, Educational Strategies, Miscue Analysis, Reading Rate, Inferences, Silent Reading, Evaluation Utilization |
| Assessment and Survey Identifiers: | Basic Reading Inventory |
| DOI: | 10.1080/10573569.2013.789780 |
| ISSN: | 1057-3569 |
| Abstract: | This study examined how effectively candidates in an MSEd in literacy education with a focus on reading program used the results from the Basic Reading Inventory to develop key instructional recommendations. The results indicated that, overall, candidates made about two thirds of the key recommendations suggested by an expert in the area of reading and reading assessment. Candidates needed to increase the specificity of strategies related to the recommendations and to decrease the number of low-priority recommendations. This article delineates suggestions regarding how teacher educators can help their candidates improve the quality and specificity of recommendations. (Contains 3 tables and 1 figure.) |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Number of References: | 25 |
| Entry Date: | 2014 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1012384 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | This study examined how effectively candidates in an MSEd in literacy education with a focus on reading program used the results from the Basic Reading Inventory to develop key instructional recommendations. The results indicated that, overall, candidates made about two thirds of the key recommendations suggested by an expert in the area of reading and reading assessment. Candidates needed to increase the specificity of strategies related to the recommendations and to decrease the number of low-priority recommendations. This article delineates suggestions regarding how teacher educators can help their candidates improve the quality and specificity of recommendations. (Contains 3 tables and 1 figure.) |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1057-3569 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/10573569.2013.789780 |
