Extending research on the validity of brief reading comprehension rate and level measures to college course success.

Abstract

Students in an undergraduate human development course (N = 215) participated in a brief assessment of their reading (comprehension level, reading speed, comprehension rate) and multiple-choice test-taking skills on the second day of class. Students first read a one-page, 400-word passage unrelated to the course and then answered 10 multiple-choice questions over the passage without referring back to the passage. To control for test-taking skills, students also answered 10 multiple-choice questions from an equivalent passage they did not read. Videotapes of student participation permitted individual assessment of time required to complete each phase. Subsequently, during the semester students took five 50-item multiple-choice exams over the major units in the course. Results showed that the brief reading comprehension measures predicted multiple-choice exam performance and that comprehension level accounted for most of the variance in exam performance. Discussion focuses on enhancing brief reading assessment procedures by including direct measures of comprehension. Keywords: Reading Comprehension, Reading Comprehension Rate, Test-taking, College Grades ********** Several measures predict success in college courses, including measures of critical thinking, generic vocabulary, background knowledge, and reading comprehension (Behrman & Street, 2005; Jackson, 2005; Williams & Eggert, 2002; Williams, Oliver, Allin, Winn, & Booher, 2003a; Williams, Oliver, Allin, Winn, & Booher, 2003b; Williams, Oliver, & Stockdale, 2004; Williams & Worth, 2002). Not all course activities require high-level critical thinking, an advanced vocabulary, or background knowledge, but virtually all course activities require student reading of course material (Behrman & Street, 2005). Thus, the current study focused on reading comprehension measures as predictors of success in a large undergraduate course. Although reading comprehension is predictive of student success (Jackson, 2005), reading speed or fluency may also be related to comprehension levels, effort required to read, and reinforcement for reading (Skinner, Pappas, & Davis, 2005). Researchers have measured reading fluency by timing students' oral reading and scoring word accuracy. These data are then used to calculate words correct per minute (WCM), which has been shown to correlate with reading comprehension and other reading skills as measured via standardized, norm-referenced tests with strong psychometric properties (Deno & Merkin, 1977; Deno, Merkin, & Chiang, 1982; Fuchs, & Fuchs, 1992; Fuchs, Fuchs, Hosp, & Jenkins, 2001; Fuchs, Fuchs, & Maxwell, 1988; Hintze & Shapiro, 1997; Jenkins & Jewell, 1993). These studies provide support for several theories that suggest causal mechanisms for explaining the relationship between reading speed and comprehension. Students who read rapidly and are not required to apply their attention or other cognitive resources (e.g., working memory) towards decoding words have more cognitive resources available to apply towards comprehension. Additionally, as time passes information may become inaccessible (e.g., fading from working memory). Thus, as they read, rapid readers may have access to more information from material read earlier than slow readers, which may enhance their ability to synthesize information as they progress through passages (LaBerge & Samuels, 1974; Perfetti, 1992; Rasinski, 2004; Stanovich, 1986). Reading, like many other skills, improves as people choose to spend more time engaged in the activity (Daly, Chafouleas, & Skinner, 2005; Stanovich, 1986). Even when slower readers are able to comprehend the material at the same level as rapid readers, rapid readers are more likely to choose to read the assigned work because it requires less time and effort and results in a higher rate of reinforcement (Billington, Skinner, Hutchins, & Malone, 2004; Skinner, 1998; Skinner, 2002; Skinner, Neddenriep, Bradley-Klug, & Ziemann, 2002; Skinner, Wallace, & Neddenriep, 2002). …