DIBELS Benchmark Goals Three Assessment Periods Per Year
5 Pages
English
Downloading requires you to have access to the YouScribe library
Learn all about the services we offer

DIBELS Benchmark Goals Three Assessment Periods Per Year

-

Downloading requires you to have access to the YouScribe library
Learn all about the services we offer
5 Pages
English

Description

DIBELS Benchmark Goals
Three Assessment Periods Per Year

KINDERGARTEN

Beginning of Year Middle of Year End of Year
Month 1 - 3 Month 4 - 6 Month 7 - 10
DIBELS Measure Scores Status Scores Status Scores Status

Initial Sound 0 - 3 At risk 0 -9 Deficit
Not administered during this
Fluency (ISF) 4 - 7 Some risk 10 - 24 Emerging assessment period
8 and above Low risk 25 and above Established

Letter Naming 0 - 1 At risk 0 - 14 At risk 0 - 28 At risk
Fluency (LNF) 2 - 7 Some risk 15 - 26 Some risk 29 - 39 Some risk
8 and above Low risk 27 and above Low risk 40 and above Low risk

Phoneme 0 - 6 At risk 0 - 9 Deficit
Not administered during this assessment
Segmentation 7 - 17 Some risk 10 - 34 Emerging period
Fluency (PSF) 18 and above Low risk 35 and above Established

Nonsense Word 0 - 4 At risk 0 - 14 At risk
Not administered during this assessment
Word Fluency 5 - 12 Some risk 15 - 24 Some risk period
(NWF-CLS) 13 and above Low risk 25 and above Low risk

BENCHMARK GOALS FOR THIS MEASURE HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED.
Word Use Tentatively, students in the lowest 20 percent of a school district using local norms should be considered at risk for poor
Fluency (WUF) language and reading outcomes, and those between the 20th percentile and 40th percentile should be considered at some
risk.

dibels.uoregon.edu
© University of Oregon Center on Teaching and Learning. All rights reserved. ...

Subjects

Informations

Published by
Reads 255
Language English

Exrait

KINDERGARTEN DIBELS Measure Initial Sound Fluency (ISF) Letter Naming Fluency (LNF) Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF) Nonsense Word Word Fluency (NWF-CLS)
Word Use Fluency (WUF)
 DIBELSBenchmark Goals  ThreeAssessment Periods Per Year
Beginning of YearMiddle of YearEnd of Year Month 1 - 3Month 4 - 6Month 7 - 10 Scores StatusScores StatusScores Status 0 - 3At risk0 -9Deficit Not administered durinthis 4 - 7Some risk10 - 24Emerging assessment period 8 and aboveLow risk25 and aboveEstablished 0 - 1At risk0 - 14At risk0 - 28At risk 2 - 7Some risk15 - 26Some risk29 - 39Some risk 8 and aboveLow risk27 and aboveLow risk40 and aboveLow risk 0 - 6At risk0 - 9Deficit Not administered durinthis assessment 7 - 17Some risk10 - 34Emerging period 18 and aboveLow risk35 and aboveEstablished 0 - 4At risk0 - 14At risk Not administered durinthis assessment 5 - 12Some risk15 - 24Some risk period 13 and aboveLow risk25 and aboveLow risk BENCHMARK GOALS FOR THIS MEASURE HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED. Tentatively, students in the lowest 20 percent of a school district using local norms should be considered at risk for poor language and reading outcomes, and those between the 20th percentile and 40th percentile should be considered at some risk.
dibels.uoregon.edu © University of Oregon Center on Teaching and Learning. All rights reserved.
 RevisionDate: July-31-2008
FIRST GRADEDIBELS Measure Letter Naming Fluency (LNF) Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF) Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF-CLS) Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) Retell Fluency (RTF)
Word Use Fluency (WUF)
 DIBELSBenchmark Goals  ThreeAssessment Periods Per Year
Beginning of YearMiddle of YearEnd of Year Month 1 - 3Month 4 - 6Month 7 - 10 Scores StatusScores StatusScores Status 0 - 24At risk Not administered during this assessmentNot administered during this 25 - 36Some risk period assessmentperiod 37 and aboveLow risk 0 - 9Deficit 0- 9Deficit 0- 9Deficit 10 - 34Emerging 10- 34Emerging 10- 34Emerging 35 and aboveEstablished 35and aboveEstablished 35and aboveEstablished 0 - 12At risk0 - 29Deficit 0- 29Deficit 13 - 23Some risk30 - 49Emerging 30- 49Emerging 24 and aboveLow risk50 and aboveEstablished 50and aboveEstablished 0 - 7At risk0 - 19At risk Not administered during this 8 - 19Some risk20 - 39Some risk assessment period 20 and aboveLow risk40 and aboveLow risk BENCHMARK GOALS FOR THIS MEASURE HAVE NOT YET BEEN ESTABLISHED. Preliminary evidence indicates that for students to be on track with Not administered during this comprehension they should meet both of the following criteria: 1) meet the Oral assessment period Reading Fluency benchmark goal and 2) have a retell score of at least 25% of their Oral Reading Fluency score. BENCHMARK GOALS FOR THIS MEASURE HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED. Tentatively, students in the lowest 20 percent of a school district using local norms should be considered at risk for poor language and reading outcomes, and those between the 20th percentile and 40th percentile should be considered at some risk.
dibels.uoregon.edu © University of Oregon Center on Teaching and Learning. All rights reserved.
 RevisionDate: July-31-2008
 DIBELSBenchmark Goals  ThreeAssessment Periods Per Year
SECOND GRADEEnd of YearBeginning of YearMiddle of Year Month 1 - 3Month 4 - 6Month 7 - 10 DIBELS MeasureScores StatusScores StatusScores Status Nonsense WordDeficit0 - 29 Not administered during thisNot administered during this FluencyEmerging30 - 49 assessment periodassessment period (NWF-CLS)Established50 and above Oral Reading0 - 51At risk0 - 25At risk0 - 69At risk Fluency (ORF)26 - 4352 - 67Some risk70 - 89Some riskSome risk 44 and above68 and aboveLow risk90 and aboveLow riskLow risk Retell Fluency1 BENCHMARK GOALS FOR THIS MEASURE HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED. 1 (RTF) Word Use2 2BENCHMARK GOALS FOR THIS MEASURE HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED. Fluency (WUF) THIRD GRADEBeginning of YearMiddle of YearEnd of Year  Month1 - 3Month 4 - 6Month 7 - 10 DIBELS MeasureScores StatusScores StatusScores Status Oral ReadingAt risk0 - 66At risk0 - 79At risk0 - 52 Fluency (ORF)53 - 76Some risk67 - 91Some risk80 - 109Some risk Low risk92 and aboveLow risk110 and aboveLow risk77 and above Retell Fluency1 BENCHMARK GOALS FOR THIS MEASURE HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED. 1 (RTF) Word Use2 BENCHMARK GOALS FOR THIS MEASURE HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED. 2 Fluency (WUF) 1:BENCHMARK GOALS FOR THIS MEASURE HAVE NOT YET BEEN ESTABLISHED. Preliminary evidence indicates that for students to be on track with comprehension they should meet both of the following criteria: 1) meet the Oral Reading Fluency benchmark goal and 2) have a retell score of at least 25% of their Oral Reading Fluency score. 2:BENCHMARK GOALS FOR THIS MEASURE HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED. Tentatively, students in the lowest 20 percent of a school district using local norms should be considered at risk for poor language and reading outcomes, and those between the 20th and percentile and 40th percentile should be considered at some risk.
dibels.uoregon.edu © University of Oregon Center on Teaching and Learning. All rights reserved.
 RevisionDate: July-31-2008
 DIBELSBenchmark Goals  ThreeAssessment Periods Per Year
FOURTH GRADEBeginning of YearMiddle of YearEnd of Year Month 4 - 6Month 7 - 10Month 1 - 3 DIBELS MeasureScores StatusScores StatusScores Status DIBELS Oral0 - 95At riskAt risk0 - 700 - 82At risk Reading Fluency (ORF)96 - 117Some risk83 - 104Some risk71 - 92Some risk 118 and aboveLow risk105 and aboveLow risk93 and aboveLow risk DIBELS Retell BENCHMARK GOALS FOR THIS MEASURE HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED.* Fluency (RTF) FIFTH GRADEEnd of YearMiddle of YearBeginning of Year Month 7 - 10Month 4 - 6Month 1 - 3 DIBELS MeasureScores StatusScores StatusScores Status DIBELS OralAt riskAt risk0 - 102At risk0 - 930 - 80 Reading Fluency (ORF)Some risk81 - 103Some risk94 - 114Some risk103 - 123 Low risk104 and above115 and aboveLow risk124 and aboveLow risk DIBELS Retell BENCHMARK GOALS FOR THIS MEASURE HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED.* Fluency (RTF) SIXTH GRADEEnd of YearMiddle of YearBeginning of Year Month 1 - 3Month 4 - 6Month 7 - 10 DIBELS MeasureScores StatusScores StatusScores Status DIBELS OralAt risk0 - 980 - 820 - 103At riskAt risk Reading Fluency (ORF)Some risk83 - 108Some risk99 - 119Some risk104 - 124 109 and aboveLow risk120 and aboveLow risk125 and aboveLow risk DIBELS Retell BENCHMARK GOALS FOR THIS MEASURE HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED.* Fluency (RTF) *Preliminary evidence indicates that children's retell scores should typically be about 50% of their oral reading fluency score, and that it is unusual for children reading more than 40 words per minute to have a retell score 25% or less than their oral reading fluency score. A retell score of less than 25% of the oral reading fluency score may indicate a problem with comprehension.
dibels.uoregon.edu © University of Oregon Center on Teaching and Learning. All rights reserved.
 RevisionDate: July-31-2008
 DIBELSBenchmark Goals  ThreeAssessment Periods Per Year
Note:Goals and cutpoints for risk for Grades 4 through 6 are based on CBM normative information from 4th and 5th grade students in Fall, Winter and Spring from Hasbrouck and Tindal (1992) as well as average slope of reading progress information from Fuchs, Fuchs, Hamlett, Walz, & Germann (1993). Empirical evidence of the percent achieving subsequent literacy goals is not yet available for these initial estimates. In addition to these preliminary estimates of goals and risk indicators, local normative information is available for each participating school district. A reasonable approximation of goals and cut scores for risk are also available from the local norms. The 40th percentile using local norms provides an approximate goal, and below the 20th percentile using local norms provides an approximate at-risk indicator. With additional research these preliminary estimates will be refined based on the odds of achieving subsequent literacy goals. Each district can examine these odds by entering scores on a selected outcome for relevant grade levels. For example, in Oregon, a state assessment is given in fifth grade with a specific goal for meeting expectations. If a participating school district enters the fifth grade scores for all fifth grade students and the Oregon State Assessment goal, theDIBELS Data Systemwill provide the odds of achieving the goal for these initial estimates of goals and risk indicators. References Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Walz, L., & Germann, G. (1993). Formative evaluation of academic progress: How much growth  canwe expect?School Psychology Review,22, 27-48. Hasbrouck, J. E., & Tindal, G. (1992, Spring). Curriculum-based oral reading fluency norms for students in grades 2 through 5.Teaching  ExceptionalChildren, pp. 41-44.
dibels.uoregon.edu © University of Oregon Center on Teaching and Learning. All rights reserved.
 RevisionDate: July-31-2008