Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Mar-Apr;47(2):125-35.
doi: 10.1177/0022219412439326. Epub 2012 Mar 21.

Test differences in diagnosing reading comprehension deficits

Affiliations

Test differences in diagnosing reading comprehension deficits

Janice M Keenan et al. J Learn Disabil. 2014 Mar-Apr.

Abstract

The authors examined the implications of test differences for defining and diagnosing comprehension deficits using reading comprehension tests. They had 995 children complete the Gray Oral Reading Test-3, the Qualitative Reading Inventory-3, the Woodcock-Johnson Passage Comprehension-3, and the Peabody Individual Achievement Test and compared which children were identified by each test as being in the lowest 10%. Although a child who performs so poorly might be expected to do poorly on all tests, the authors found that the average overlap between tests in diagnosing comprehension difficulties was only 43%. Consistency in diagnosis was greater for younger children, when comprehension deficits are the result of weaker decoding skills, than for older children. Inconsistencies between tests were just as evident when identifying the top performers. The different children identified as having a comprehension deficit by each test were compared on four profile variables-word decoding skill, IQ, ADHD symptoms, and working memory skill-to understand the nature of the different deficits assessed by each test. Theoretical and practical implications of these test differences in defining and diagnosing comprehension deficits are discussed.

Keywords: classification; comprehension; identification.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Betjemann RS, Keenan JM, Olson RK, DeFries JR. Choice of reading comprehension test influences the outcomes of genetic analyses. Scientific Studies of Reading. 2011;15:363–382. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brock SE, Knapp P. Reading comprehension abilities of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Attention Disorders. 1996;1(3):173–185.
    1. Cain K, Oakhill J. Reading comprehension difficulties: Correlates, causes, and consequences. In: Cain K, Oakhill J, editors. Children's comprehension problems in oral and written language. Guilford Press; New York: 2007. pp. 41–75.
    1. Case R, Kurland M, Goldberg J. Operational efficiency and the growth of short-term memory span. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 1982;33:386–404.
    1. Catts HW, Adlof SM, Weismer SE. Language deficits in poor comprehenders: A case for the simple view of reading. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research. 2006;49:278–293. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources