Analysis of Textual Features of a New Reading Comprehension Assessment: MOCCA

Autor/inn/en	Seipel, Ben; Biancarosa, Gina; Carlson, Sarah; Davison, Mark
Institution	Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness (SREE)
Titel	Analysis of Textual Features of a New Reading Comprehension Assessment: MOCCA
Quelle	(2015), (9 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Reading Comprehension; Reading Tests; Cloze Procedure; Multiple Choice Tests; Test Items; Item Analysis; Correlation + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Leseverstehen; Lesetest; Lückentext; Multiple choice examinations; Multiple-choice tests, Multiple-choice examinations; Multiple-Choice-Verfahren; Test content; Testaufgabe; Itemanalyse; Korrelation
Abstract	Previous research has established two types of struggling readers: those who struggle with lower-level reading skills and those who struggle with higher-level reading skills (Cain & Oakhill, 2006; Perfetti, 2007). The latter group is commonly termed "poor comprehenders": readers who exhibit poor comprehension compared to peers with similar word-reading skills and vocabulary (e.g., Cain & Oakhill, 1999, 2006; Carlson, Seipel, & McMaster, 2011, 2014; Rapp et al., 2007). The original Multiple-choice Online Cloze Comprehension Assessment (MOCCA) was designed to differentiate among poor comprehenders in terms of the types of comprehension processes they use during reading (cf. Carlson et al., 2014). MOCCA consists of 40 items, which use short narrative texts (seven sentences long) written around a fourth grade Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (Kincaid, Fishburne, Rogers, & Chissom, 1975). Each item (i.e., text) is a discourse-level maze task in which the sixth sentence is deleted. Readers read each text and choose among four multiple-choice response types to complete the missing sentence. The purpose of this study was to determine which textual features are correlated with and affect item difficulty (proportion correct, item discrimination, and point-biserial correlations for the original MOCCA test items. This information will be used to develop item-writing guidelines, edit original test items, and write new test items. The results of this study will be used to inform the writing of new MOCCA test items to better differentiate between good and poor comprehenders, and the better differentiate between the two types of struggling comprehenders. Appended are: (1) References; and (2) Tables and Figures. (ERIC).
Anmerkungen	Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness. 2040 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208. Tel: 202-495-0920; Fax: 202-640-4401; e-mail: inquiries@sree.org; Web site: http://www.sree.org
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01