Oral reading has a varied history of interpretation (12) and IS presently under scrutiny in terms of characteristics rather than quantity (5). Despite the doubt that controversies generate, the identification and tabulation of oral reading errors dominate decisions generated in practice us,ing informal reading inventories. In practice, informal reading inventories depend on identification, scoring, and interpretation of oral reading errors. Controversies are usually ignored perhaps in the hope that the expert judgment of reading specialists overcomes the difficulties. Beldin (1) explores the controversial history of informal inventories. From early studies to the present, doubt surrounds scoring criteria ( 7, 9, 10). This study examines the process of identification and scoring of oral reading errors by well-qualified reading specialists.
Page, W. D., & Carlson, K. L. (1975). The Process of Observing Oral Reading Scores. Reading Horizons, 15 (3). Retrieved from http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/reading_horizons/vol15/iss3/4