This FIELDS_readme20251210.txt file was generated on 20251210 by Madison Golden ------------------- GENERAL INFORMATION ------------------- 1. Title of Dataset UURC RLA & Flash Psychometric Data 2. Author Information Principal Investigator Contact Information Name: Kelly Patrick Institution: University of Utah Department: University of Utah Reading Clinic Address: SAEC 3202 Email: Kelly.Patrick@utah.edu ORCID: 0000-0001-6985-3480 Associate or Co-investigator Contact Information Name: Kathleen Brown Institution: University of Utah Department: University of Utah Reading Clinic Address: SAEC 3202 Email: Kathleen.Brown@utah.edu ORCID: 0000-0003-1415-9939 Associate or Co-investigator Contact Information Name: Matt Fields Institution: University of Utah Department: University of Utah Reading Clinic Address: SAEC 3202 Email: Matt.Fields@utah.edu ORCID: 0009-0009-4437-3136 3. Date of data collection (single date, range, approximate date) Start Date 2006-08-01 End Date 2007-06-30 4. Geographic location of data collection (where was data collected?): Utah public and private elementary schools 5. Information about funding sources that supported the collection of the data: NCLB-ESSA through UTAH SYSTEM OF HIGHER EDUCATION -------------------------- SHARING/ACCESS INFORMATION -------------------------- 1. Licenses/restrictions placed on the data: Public Domain - This data is free of copyright restrictions (e.g., government sponsored data). 2. Links to publications that cite or use the data: 3. Links to other publicly accessible locations of the data: NA 4. Links/relationships to ancillary data sets: NA 5. Was data derived from another source? No 6. Recommended citation for the data: Patrick, K., Brown, K. & Fields, M. (2025). "UURC RLA & Flash Psychometric Data". The Hive: University of Utah Research Data Repository. https://doi.org/10.7278/S5d-2mx4-e929 --------------------- DATA & FILE OVERVIEW --------------------- 1. File List A. Filename: Student Data.xls Short description: The Student Data file is the results of giving each student a Reading Level Assessment (RLA), a timed word assessment (Flash), and the GORT-D (a commercially available assessment), broken down by rate, accuracy, and comprehension for each of several passages or word lists. B. Filename: Flash Items Correct.xls Short description: The Flash Items Correct shows whether or not each student was able to successfully identify each Flash word in the timed condition. C. Filename: Order of Presentations.xls Short description: The Order of Presentations file  show the order each student received the five assessment presentation methods. 2. Relationship between files: Student Data collected across three days, data for item analysis of one of the measures, and the order of presentation of the measures by student 3. Additional related data collected that was not included in the current data package: NA 4. Are there multiple versions of the dataset? yes/no No -------------------------- METHODOLOGICAL INFORMATION -------------------------- 1. Description of methods used for collection/generation of data: From the methods section of the in press document: We selected 192 second through fifth grade students, sampled from 12 classes in three urban public schools and one urban parochial school in the Intermountain West. For the purposes of this study, we included students with a range of reading abilities, that is, second through fifth graders with low, medium or high reading skill from each school. Using oral reading fluency scores (ORF) from Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills, 6th Edition (DIBELS Next, 2010; Good et al., 2002a; 2002b), we rank-ordered students in each grade and eliminated the lowest two students from each grade to avoid selecting non-readers. We then randomly selected four students from the lowest third, four from the middle third, and four from the highest third of each grade (i.e., 12 students from each grade) in each school, yielding a sample of 192 students. For one week, students were tested for 135 minutes (about 5 hours) over three sessions. All testing sessions were audio-recorded for use in resolving scoring issues. For the study, a team of nine reading specialists served as assessment examiners and administered all assessments in early spring of the school year. All examiners received four hours of training on standardized administration and scoring procedures for all measures. Assessments included: IRI word recognition lists, IRI reading passages and Gray Oral Reading Tests-Diagnostic (GORT-D) (Bryant & Wiederholt, 1991) passages. All assessments were counterbalanced to control for order effects. To ensure scoring fidelity, all score calculations were verified by a different examiner and corrected as needed. 2. Methods for processing the data:    Procedures for the IRI graded passages included: (1) presenting individual students with a graded passage (see Figure 2), (2) informing the student that questions would follow, (3) providing a one sentence prompt related to the plot or topic, (4) starting the timer when the student read first word, (5) noting the time when the student reached the end of the passage, and (6) asking three to seven short-answer comprehension questions after the student finished reading. Students began reading a mid-grade-one level passage and continued to read successively higher-level passages until they failed to meet continuation criteria for instructional level accuracy and/or rate, at which point the examiner discontinued this portion of the assessment. As students read aloud, examiners noted errors (substitutions, insertions, omissions, self-corrections, and examiner helps), recorded the time required to read the passage, and the accuracy of student response to comprehension questions. Examiners used traditional IRI instructional level criteria to score oral reading accuracy, oral reading rate, and comprehension. 3. Instrument- or software-specific information needed to interpret the data:    Instructions for the most recent NSSI (now called RLA) are available at https://uurc.utah.edu/educators/assessments.php. 4. Standards and calibration information, if appropriate:     The RLA criteria chart is available at https://uurc.utah.edu/general/fluencycriteriachart.php 5. Environmental/experimental conditions:    All students receive all five presentation methods for the assessments as per the Order of Presentations.xls file. 6. Describe any quality-assurance procedures performed on the data:    All scoring was double checked by a second examiner on date given. 7. People involved with sample collection, processing, analysis and/or submission: UURC staff members: Michele Blake Ursula Brock Kathleen Brown Grace Craig Matt Fields Linda Jensen Trina Robbins Kris Vassel ------------------------------------------------ DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR:  Student Data.xls ------------------------------------------------ 1. Number of variables: 194 2. Number of cases/rows: 182 3. The full variable list with definitions is available to download in the same location as the dataset and this README file. 4. Missing data codes: NA 5. Specialized formats of other abbreviations used Dlta variables: change in Flash (F) or IRI (N) across formats Exr variables: Examiner coded numbers Lvl variables: computed by applying criteria to NSSI form A or B Accuracy (A), Rate (R), or Comprehension (C) Levels P (primer = mid G1), and End of Grade 1-8 GORT-D Accuracy (A), Rate (R), or Comprehension (C) for Passages 1-9 Flash Levels PP (preprimer), P (primer), Grade 1-8 Manual presentation (M) or Computer presentation (C) Flash (“timed”) presentation (F) or Untimed (U) ------------------------------------------------------- DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR:  Flash Items Correct.xls ------------------------------------------------------- 1. Number of variables: 202 2. Number of cases/rows: 182 3. The full variable list with definitions is available to download in the same location as the dataset and this README file. ---------------------------------------------------------- DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR:  Order of Presentations.xls ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. Number of variables: 7 2. Number of cases/rows: 192 3. The full variable list with definitions is available to download in the same location as the dataset and this README file.