首页> 外文期刊>Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties >Research-driven reading assessment: Drilling to the core
【24h】

Research-driven reading assessment: Drilling to the core

机译:研究驱动的阅读评估:深入研究核心

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

There is considerable interest and controversy in the community concerning how our students are faring in the task of mastering reading. Broad scale assessment, formerly at a State level and now at a National level (NAPLAN), is potentially valuable in helping answer this question in a broad sense. However, there are limitations to the value of this style of testing when the only tasks included are those intended to assess reading comprehension. It is unquestionably a major function of reading, but not the only important component. The assessment of other critical components can supply valuable information not available in the NAPLAN process. For example, other forms of assessment can assist in the identification and management of students at-risk even before reading instruction commences. They can also help identify those making slow progress at any year level. This is especially important given the usually stable learning trajectory from the very early stages. If specific interventions are implemented, appropriate reading assessment can provide ongoing information about the effectiveness of the chosen approach. There is an important question implicit in this potentially valuable activity. What sorts of assessment are likely to be most beneficial in precluding reading pitfalls and enhancing reading success? In this paper, the emphasis is directed towards assessment of those aspects of reading that have been identified by research as critical to reading development.
机译:关于我们的学生在掌握阅读方面的表现如何,社区引起了极大的兴趣和争议。以前在州一级,现在在国家一级(NAPLAN)进行的大规模评估,可能有助于广泛地回答这个问题。但是,当仅包含旨在评估阅读理解力的任务时,这种测试方式的价值就会受到限制。毫无疑问,它是阅读的主要功能,但不是唯一的重要组成部分。其他关键组件的评估可以提供有价值的信息,而这些信息在NAPLAN流程中是不可用的。例如,即使在阅读指导开始之前,其他形式的评估也可以帮助识别和管理处于危险中的学生。他们还可以帮助确定那些在任何年份都进展缓慢的人。考虑到从一开始就通常稳定的学习轨迹,这一点尤其重要。如果实施了特定的干预措施,则适当的阅读评估可以提供有关所选方法有效性的持续信息。在这一潜在有价值的活动中存在一个重要的问题。在阻止阅读陷阱和提高阅读成功率方面,什么样的评估可能是最有益的?在本文中,重点是评估研究认为对阅读发展至关重要的阅读方面。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号