Research: 'Do nonword reading tests for children measure what we want them to? An analysis of year 2 error responses'

Downloads and links to relevant research and articles, along with book recommendations.
Post Reply
User avatar
Debbie_Hepplewhite
Posts: 2498
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:42 pm

Research: 'Do nonword reading tests for children measure what we want them to? An analysis of year 2 error responses'

Post by Debbie_Hepplewhite »

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10. ... ode=rald20
Do nonword reading tests for children measure what we want them to? An analysis of year 2 error responses

Anne Castles, Vince Polito, Stephen Pritchard, Thushara Anandakumar & Max Coltheart

ABSTRACT

Nonword reading measures are widely used to index children’s phonics knowledge, and are included in the Phonics Screening Check currently implemented in England and under consideration in Australia. However, critics have argued that the use of nonword measures disadvantages good readers, as they will be influenced by their strong lexical knowledge and err by making word errors (e.g. reading flarm as “farm”). We tested this claim by examining the errors made by a group of 64 Year 2 children when reading aloud a set of simple nonwords. We found that stronger word readers were less likely to make a word error response than weaker word readers, with their most prevalent type of error being another nonword that was highly similar to the target. We conclude that nonword reading measures are a valid index of phonics knowledge, and that these tests do not disadvantage children who are already reading words well.
Prof. Castles has kindly provided a link to a preprint copy:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329183062
User avatar
Debbie_Hepplewhite
Posts: 2498
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:42 pm

Re: Do nonword reading tests for children measure what we want them to? An analysis of year 2 error responses

Post by Debbie_Hepplewhite »

Below is a thread featuring the suggestion that better readers are at a disadvantage in a phonics check, such as the one used in England at the end of Year One, as they turn nonsense words into real words 'to make sense' of them:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1132
Vociferous critic of Minister Nick Gibb's promotion of systematic synthetic phonics and the advent of the statutory Year One Phonics Screening Check, Margaret Clark, heads up a survey about the phonics check. The results are described in 'Nursery World'. The phonics check is incredibly important in a number of ways - and IFERI promotes universal uptake not least because it is a simple way of teachers getting an indication of their phonics teaching effectiveness - it is essential, therefore, that responses to critics of the check continue to be provided and that both the article and survey must not serve to mislead.
User avatar
Debbie_Hepplewhite
Posts: 2498
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:42 pm

Re: Research: 'Do nonword reading tests for children measure what we want them to? An analysis of year 2 error responses

Post by Debbie_Hepplewhite »

Journalist Rebecca Urban writes an important piece in The Australian featuring the research by Professor Anne Castles and colleagues:
Unions phonics tests objections 'proven to be nonsense'
https://iferi.org/wp-content/uploads/20 ... 18-002.jpg
Post Reply