Development of Diagnostic Test in Reading for Grade 7

Art  Mangubat,

Development of Diagnostic Test in Reading for Grade 7

Discipline: Education

Abstract:

Reading is unquestionably a crucial component of any educational system because it not only underlies it but also permeates its aspects. Therefore, reading should be appropriately assessed. This mixed-methods developmental study developed a test package for assessing the reading competency of Grade 7 learners. The researcher used a variety of scales for validation, attribute assessment, assessment adherence principles, and indicators of a good reading diagnostic test. Analysis methods included mean, weighted mean, difficulty-discrimination indices, and Cronbach’s Alpha. It was revealed that the comprehension test has a strong reliability score for a classroom test (α=.700). In contrast, the vocabulary test has a somewhat lowreliability score (α=.600). The validity results indicated that the fluency test was extremely valid (4.535), while both vocabulary and comprehension tests were very valid (4.322, 4.486). It was described as very good (4.33), and the experts concurred that it adheres to the indicators of a good reading diagnostic test (fluency: 1.00; vocabulary: 0.97; and comprehension: 0.97). Generally, the reading diagnostic test is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing students’ reading competence levels, particularly in terms of fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension, but further validation is required.

References:

Clay, B. (2011). Is This a Is Trick Question? A Short Guide to Writing Effective Test Questions.
Cohen, A. S., & Wollack, J. A. (2015). Handbook on test development: Helpful tips for creating reliable and valid classroom tests. University of Wisconsin-Madison: Madison, WI, USA.
Crossman, A. (2017). Understanding Purposive Sampling An Overview of the Method and Its Applications. Thoughtco. https://bit.ly/3T6MMUt
Department of Education. (2010). DM 266, s. 2010 Philippine Informal Reading Inventory (Phil- IRI) Reporting and Database System. https://bit.ly/3t66LIf
DepEd. (2018a). DO 14 s.2018. Policy Guidelines on the Administration of the Revised Philippine Informal Reading Inventory. https://bit.ly/3N8wDdq
DepED. (2018b). The Philippine Informal Reading Inventory Manual 2018. https://bit.ly/3RoRdbP
Dunkley, D. (2012). Diagnostic Assessment in Theory and Practice, 55–65.
Garnham, A. (2005). Language comprehension. K. LAMBERTS & RL GOLDSTONE The Handbook of cognition, London: Sage, 241-254.
Hardcastle, M. A., Usher, K., & Holmes, C. (2006). Carspecken's five-stage critical qualitative research method: An application to nursing research. Qualitative Health Research, 16(1), 151-161.
Hudson, R. F., Lane, H. B., & Pullen, P. C. (2005). Reading fluency assessment and instruction: What, why, and how?. The Reading Teacher, 58(8), 702-714.
Kooij, J. J. S. (2013). Diagnostic Assessment.
LaDuca, A., Downing, S. M., & Henzel, T. R. (1995). 5. Systematic Item Writing And Test Construction.
Linan-Thompson, S., Hickman-Davis, P., & Light, M. (2001). Essential Reading Strategies for the Struggling Reader: Activities for an Accelerated Reading Program. Texas Education Agency, 1701 N. Congress Ave., Austin, TX 78701-1494.
Luz, J. M. (2017). Brigada Eskwela: Essays on Philippine Education. Anvil Publishing, Inc..
Mertens, W. (2017). Quantitative data analysis. Springer.
Musa, A. K. J., & Balami, A. Z. (2016). Effects of phonological awareness training on the reading performance of children with dyslexia in primary schools In Maiduguri metropolis, Borno State, Nigeria. American Journal of Educational Research, 4(15), 1078-1085.
Sainsbury, M., Harrison, C., & Watts, A. (Eds.). (2006). Assessing Reading: From Theories to Classrooms: an International Multi-disciplinary Investigation of the Theory of Reading Assessment and Its Practical Implications at the Beginning of the 21st Century. National Foundation for educational research.
SEAMEO INNOTECH. (2012). K TO 12 TOOLKIT: Resource Guide for Teacher Educators, School Administrators and Teachers. Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization (SEAMEO) Regional Center for Educational Innovation and Technology (INNOTECH). https://bit.ly/3T7mGAv
Shanahan, T. (2005). The National Reading Panel Report. Practical Advice for Teachers. Learning Point Associates/North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL).
Singh, H. (2018). Understanding Gradient Boosting Machines| by Harshdeep Singh| Towards Data Science.
Smulowitz, S. (2017). Document analysis. The international encyclopedia of communication research methods, 1-8.
Snellings, P., van der Leij, A., Blok, H., & de Jong, P. F. (2010). Reading fluency and speech perception speed of beginning readers with persistent reading problems: the perception of initial stop consonants and consonant clusters. Annals of dyslexia, 60, 151-174.
Sofaer, S. (2002). Qualitative research methods. International journal for quality in health care, 14(4), 329-336.
Stahl, K. A. D., Flanigan, K., & McKenna, M. C. (2019). Assessment for reading instruction. Guilford Publications.
Statisticshowto. (n.d.). What is Classical Test Theory. https://bit.ly/415pIr9
The Saga of a Town (n.d.). The Official Website of the Local Government of Tinambac. https://bit.ly/3RtE8OD
William, J. (2018). What are Different Types of Questionnaires. Flatworld Solutions. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/3Nf6vgN
Yu, M. E., & Lin, Y. C. (2002). Principles for Writing Multiple-Choice Items in Vocabulary, Grammar, and Reading Tests: A Study on the Test Making Process of an Achievement Test at Fooyin Institute of Technology. 宜蘭技術學報, (8), 107-114.
Yuko, S. (2005). Analysis of Objective Test Items : Towards a Revision of the Placement Test, 119–127. https://bit.ly/3NfrfFf
Zeng, J., & Wyse, A. (2009). Introduction to classical test theory. Michigan, Washington, US.
Zutell, J., & Rasinski, T. V. (1991). Training teachers to attend to their students’ oral reading fluency. Theory into practice, 30(3), 211-217.