Assessing Reading Fluency.

By Timothy V. Rasinski. 2004

203 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/312f45acdab77ed3c0d49086960c0e4aab37ff8f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Illuminating the Effects of Dynamic Lighting on Student Learning (2012, background): “In addition to the automaticity issue, prosody also correlates to good comprehension (Rasinski, 2004, 2010; Wright, Sherman, & Jones, 2004).”
Is Reading Fluency a Key for Successful High School Reading (2005, methodology): “Although reading rate does not capture the full meaning of fluency, it is considered a useful and valid measure of fluency (Rasinski, 2004).”
Students' motivational and emotional experiences and their relationship to persistence during academic challenge in mathematics and reading (2013, background): “fluency suggest that less than 93% accuracy represents a frustration level and excessive challenge, whereas 93–96% accuracy represents an appropriately challenging instructional level of difficulty (Rasinski, 2011).”
Teaching Reading Fluency to Struggling Readers: Method, Materials, and Evidence (2009, background): “…she decided to implement a fluency-oriented routine of her own in her classroom that focused on repeated reading and performance of readers theater scripts and other materials meant to be rehearsed and performed for an audience (e.g., speeches, poetry, dialogues; Griffith & Rasinski, 2004).”
The Complex Nature of Reading Fluency: A Multidimensional View (2008, background): “…of its validity and reliability (e.g., Deno, Marston, Shinn, & Tindal, 1983; Deno, Mirkin, & Chiang, 1982; Fuchs et al., 1988, 2001; Good, Simmons, & Kame’enui, 2001; Hosp & Fuchs, 2005; Marston, 1989; Shinn et al., 1992; Stecker, Fuchs, & Fuchs, 2005, but see Rasinski, 2004; Samuels, 2006).”
Reading Fluency: More Than Automaticity? More Than a Concern for the Primary Grades? (2009, unknown): “The MFSG is an elaboration of the fluency rubric used in the NAEP studies of oral reading (Pinell et al., 1995; Daane et al., 2005) that reported significant correlations (predictive validity) between oral reading prosody and fourth-grade students’ silent reading comprehension.”
Oral Reading Fluency Norms: A Valuable Assessment Tool for Reading Teachers (2006, background): “Publications designed to help teachers understand what fluency is and how to teach it (see Osborn & Lehr, 2004), as well as how to assess reading fluency (see Rasinski, 2004), are now readily available .”