17 Reading assessment
An understanding of the principles and uses of assessment is essential for all
teachers, and in particular for teachers of reading. (Snow, Griffin, & Burns,
2005: 179)
Reading assessment has great power to inform researchers, teachers,
administrators, and policy makers. Assessment practices can significantly
benefit the learning environment or they can inflict great harm. Reading
assessment, therefore, needs to be treated with great care, attention,
and respect. Teachers, especially, have a responsibility to understand
the uses and the impacts of reading assessment and be mindful of the
consequences of assessment.
Reading assessments are used for many purposes, but all appropriate
uses begin from an understanding of the reading construct, an awareness
of the development of reading abilities, and an effort to reflect the con-
struct in assessment tasks. The first five chapters of this book, in effect,
represent a reasonable interpretation of the construct of reading ability.
Chapters 10 through 15 describe key aspects of the reading development
process. The complexity of the construct of reading, as well as its devel-
opment, also reveals the potential complexity of reading assessment.
Reading assessment can be intimidating and sometimes overwhelming
for many teachers and administrators; thus, a first goal of this chapter is
to present a straightforward framework that categorizes the many uses
and purposes for assessment. A fairly simple, yet thorough framework
should allow readers to sort through their own assessment experiences
in a way that gives interpretive force to the framework. The chapter then
outlines and describes a number of major options under each category in
the assessment framework. These assessment options are equally appli-
cable in both L1 and L2 contexts, though important L2 test and assess-
ment practices are noted where relevant. No effort at comprehensiveness
is intended for assessment practices and descriptions. A number of very
good books provide detailed descriptions and discussions of the many
options noted for assessment practices (e.g., Alderson, 2000; McKenna
& Stahl, 2004). The third section considers a number of innovations and
352
, Reading assessment 353
challenges for reading assessment. The fourth section addresses a set of
further issues for reading assessment.
Goals for reading assessment
Reading assessments are meant to provide feedback on the skills, pro-
cesses, and knowledge resources that represent reading abilities (Chap-
ters 1–5), though it is important to note that different assessment
practices may assume different theories of reading and reading develop-
ment. Assessment in general can be categorized in a number of ways, and
all assessment frameworks serve important purposes. Commonly, assess-
ment has been categorized in terms of (a) norm-reference and criterion-
reference testing; (b) formative and summative assessment; (c) formal
and informal (or alternative) assessment; and (d) proficiency, achieve-
ment, placement, and diagnostic assessment. For the purposes of this
book, reading assessment is organized and described in terms of five
basic assessment purposes listed in Table 17.1.
Table 17.1. Five purposes for reading assessment
1. Reading-proficiency assessment (standardized testing)
2. Assessment of classroom learning
3. Assessment for learning (supporting student learning is the purpose)
4. Assessment of curricular effectiveness
5. Assessment for research purposes
There is an inevitable overlap among specific test uses across these
categories, but these categories, nonetheless, serve as a useful framework
for organizing reading assessment.
Reading-proficiency assessment
Assessment of reading proficiency is important as a way to understand
students’ overall reading abilities (based on some assumed construct of
reading) and to determine if students are appropriately prepared for
further learning and educational advancement. Commonly, this type of
assessment is referred to as standardized testing, although local groups
and researchers also develop proficiency tests of different types. In most
respects, proficiency assessment represents high-stakes testing because
decisions are often made about students’ future educational goals and
opportunities. Alternatively, this type of assessment may lead to special
education or reading-disability designations – labels that, once applied,
, 354 Expanding reading comprehension skills
are hard to remove from a student’s record. Reading-proficiency assess-
ment is also sometimes used for student placement, for policy decisions,
for curriculum changes, or for program, teacher, or institutional evalu-
ations.
Assessment of classroom learning
Assessment of reading improvement in classroom settings involves the
measurement of skills and knowledge gained over a period of time and is
commonly referred to as summative or achievement testing. Sometimes,
proficiency assessments are used to measure student progress from year
to year (as in a final exam), but this type of reading assessment does
not capture ongoing student gains made in reading skills in the class-
room. Year-end testing actually measures growth in proficiency from
year to year rather than measuring gains in reading abilities based on
what was taught in class. Much more commonly, assessment of class-
room learning uses tasks that reflect the material taught in class and
the skills practiced. Typically, the teacher, teacher groups, or curriculum
groups (or textbook-materials writers) develop these tests, and they are
responsible for deciding what represents a measure of success, as well as
what steps to take as a result of assessment outcomes.
Teachers have multiple opportunities to assess student learning at
several points in any semester using common techniques (e.g., end-of-
unit tests, quizzes of various types, postreading comprehension ques-
tions, etc.), but some classroom assessment alternatives are less obvious.
Informal and alternative assessment options are central for the effective
assessment of learning (e.g., student observations, self-reporting mea-
sures, progress charts, engagement and group work, group outcomes
assessment, interviews), and they usually provide converging evidence
over time for the appropriate summative assessment at the end of the
school year. Assessment of learning can be either normative (how stu-
dents compare to each other) or criterion-based (how well students per-
form on curriculum standards and established learning goals). These
two testing purposes should lead to somewhat different tests and dif-
ferent scoring. To give the simplest example, normative testing would
discourage every student from receiving an “A,” but criterion-based tests
may include all students receiving an “A.”
Assessment for learning
Assessment for learning involves a type of reading assessment that is
not commonly discussed and is somewhat innovative in discussions of
L2 assessment. This assessment purpose is intended to support and pro-
mote student learning, in this case, the improvement of reading abilities.
An understanding of the principles and uses of assessment is essential for all
teachers, and in particular for teachers of reading. (Snow, Griffin, & Burns,
2005: 179)
Reading assessment has great power to inform researchers, teachers,
administrators, and policy makers. Assessment practices can significantly
benefit the learning environment or they can inflict great harm. Reading
assessment, therefore, needs to be treated with great care, attention,
and respect. Teachers, especially, have a responsibility to understand
the uses and the impacts of reading assessment and be mindful of the
consequences of assessment.
Reading assessments are used for many purposes, but all appropriate
uses begin from an understanding of the reading construct, an awareness
of the development of reading abilities, and an effort to reflect the con-
struct in assessment tasks. The first five chapters of this book, in effect,
represent a reasonable interpretation of the construct of reading ability.
Chapters 10 through 15 describe key aspects of the reading development
process. The complexity of the construct of reading, as well as its devel-
opment, also reveals the potential complexity of reading assessment.
Reading assessment can be intimidating and sometimes overwhelming
for many teachers and administrators; thus, a first goal of this chapter is
to present a straightforward framework that categorizes the many uses
and purposes for assessment. A fairly simple, yet thorough framework
should allow readers to sort through their own assessment experiences
in a way that gives interpretive force to the framework. The chapter then
outlines and describes a number of major options under each category in
the assessment framework. These assessment options are equally appli-
cable in both L1 and L2 contexts, though important L2 test and assess-
ment practices are noted where relevant. No effort at comprehensiveness
is intended for assessment practices and descriptions. A number of very
good books provide detailed descriptions and discussions of the many
options noted for assessment practices (e.g., Alderson, 2000; McKenna
& Stahl, 2004). The third section considers a number of innovations and
352
, Reading assessment 353
challenges for reading assessment. The fourth section addresses a set of
further issues for reading assessment.
Goals for reading assessment
Reading assessments are meant to provide feedback on the skills, pro-
cesses, and knowledge resources that represent reading abilities (Chap-
ters 1–5), though it is important to note that different assessment
practices may assume different theories of reading and reading develop-
ment. Assessment in general can be categorized in a number of ways, and
all assessment frameworks serve important purposes. Commonly, assess-
ment has been categorized in terms of (a) norm-reference and criterion-
reference testing; (b) formative and summative assessment; (c) formal
and informal (or alternative) assessment; and (d) proficiency, achieve-
ment, placement, and diagnostic assessment. For the purposes of this
book, reading assessment is organized and described in terms of five
basic assessment purposes listed in Table 17.1.
Table 17.1. Five purposes for reading assessment
1. Reading-proficiency assessment (standardized testing)
2. Assessment of classroom learning
3. Assessment for learning (supporting student learning is the purpose)
4. Assessment of curricular effectiveness
5. Assessment for research purposes
There is an inevitable overlap among specific test uses across these
categories, but these categories, nonetheless, serve as a useful framework
for organizing reading assessment.
Reading-proficiency assessment
Assessment of reading proficiency is important as a way to understand
students’ overall reading abilities (based on some assumed construct of
reading) and to determine if students are appropriately prepared for
further learning and educational advancement. Commonly, this type of
assessment is referred to as standardized testing, although local groups
and researchers also develop proficiency tests of different types. In most
respects, proficiency assessment represents high-stakes testing because
decisions are often made about students’ future educational goals and
opportunities. Alternatively, this type of assessment may lead to special
education or reading-disability designations – labels that, once applied,
, 354 Expanding reading comprehension skills
are hard to remove from a student’s record. Reading-proficiency assess-
ment is also sometimes used for student placement, for policy decisions,
for curriculum changes, or for program, teacher, or institutional evalu-
ations.
Assessment of classroom learning
Assessment of reading improvement in classroom settings involves the
measurement of skills and knowledge gained over a period of time and is
commonly referred to as summative or achievement testing. Sometimes,
proficiency assessments are used to measure student progress from year
to year (as in a final exam), but this type of reading assessment does
not capture ongoing student gains made in reading skills in the class-
room. Year-end testing actually measures growth in proficiency from
year to year rather than measuring gains in reading abilities based on
what was taught in class. Much more commonly, assessment of class-
room learning uses tasks that reflect the material taught in class and
the skills practiced. Typically, the teacher, teacher groups, or curriculum
groups (or textbook-materials writers) develop these tests, and they are
responsible for deciding what represents a measure of success, as well as
what steps to take as a result of assessment outcomes.
Teachers have multiple opportunities to assess student learning at
several points in any semester using common techniques (e.g., end-of-
unit tests, quizzes of various types, postreading comprehension ques-
tions, etc.), but some classroom assessment alternatives are less obvious.
Informal and alternative assessment options are central for the effective
assessment of learning (e.g., student observations, self-reporting mea-
sures, progress charts, engagement and group work, group outcomes
assessment, interviews), and they usually provide converging evidence
over time for the appropriate summative assessment at the end of the
school year. Assessment of learning can be either normative (how stu-
dents compare to each other) or criterion-based (how well students per-
form on curriculum standards and established learning goals). These
two testing purposes should lead to somewhat different tests and dif-
ferent scoring. To give the simplest example, normative testing would
discourage every student from receiving an “A,” but criterion-based tests
may include all students receiving an “A.”
Assessment for learning
Assessment for learning involves a type of reading assessment that is
not commonly discussed and is somewhat innovative in discussions of
L2 assessment. This assessment purpose is intended to support and pro-
mote student learning, in this case, the improvement of reading abilities.
