DIAGNOSTIC READING TEST INTERPRETATION BY READING TEACHERS

Abstract

This study analyzed remedial reading teachers' interpretations of the performance of two fifth-grade disabled readers on four subtests of the Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test - Green Level, Form A. Teachers' interpretations were compared with a criterion set of responses. The extent and nature of variation from the criterion were explored. Further analysis was made to determine whether teachers reported using similar data cues and whether there were identifiable patterns of interpretation characteristic of some or all of the teachers.;The 71 subjects determined strengths, weakeness and two remedial needs for each pupil. They ranked, in order of usefulness, two sets of data cues which were provided for their use, indicated possible causes for the pupils' difficulties, and suggested additional information that might have enabled them to more adequately diagnose the pupils' reading progress.;Teachers' agreement with the criterion interpretations was low. Agreement was lower on those items of interpretation which described the pupils' reading strengths than on those which described weaknesses. Agreement was also lower on those items which described the pupils' performance on specific than on global subtest categories such as phonetic analysis or structural analysis.;Teachers identified item analysis as most useful and raw scores as least useful of the five test data cues.;Age, grade level and each pupil's classroom teacher's comments were considered most useful background cues. Parental information such as occupation was identified as the least useful for diagnosis.;Ninety-four percent of the teachers suggested emotional factors as the major source of both pupils' reading difficulties.;I.Q. scores and pupils' performance on other standardized tests and in other subject areas were most often suggested as necessary for adequate diagnosis.;There was no clear or significant pattern of agreement either with the criterion interpretation or among the teachers themselves.;This study raises questions about the role of standardized test data for diagnosing reading disability. Although they provide an objective approach to measuring reading progress, this study indicated that subjective data such as pupils' emotional stability and peer-sibling relationships were necessary and useful aids for interpreting the scores.