The purpose of this study was to examine three means of universal screening to identify students in need of reading interventions at the secondary school level. Specifically the results of the Colorado State Assessment Program (CSAP), the Test of Silent Contextual Reading Fluency (TOSCRF) (Hammill, Wiederholt, & Allen, 2006) and the Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency (TOSWRF) (Mather, Hammill, Allen, & Roberts, 2004) were used to group students in a Response to Intervention Framework of Tier 1 (needing no intervention), Tier 2 (needing intervention) and Tier 3 (needing intensive intervention). Categorization results were compared to determine the accuracy of identification by these screening tools. Analysis of the results indicated a significant difference between the CSAP and each of the other screening tools. Use of state assessment results alone resulted in under identification of students in need of interventions as compared to use of the TOSCRF or TOSWRF. No significant differences by gender across the three tests were seen. A significant difference was seen between the performance of Hispanic students and White students; this, however, could be attributed to the sample size. In addition, no significant interaction effects of gender by Hispanic/White ethnicity were noted for each of the three tests. Finally, no significance was seen within each screening tool by grade; there was, however, significance across the three screening tools by grade. Implications for practice, as well as future research, are discussed.
","abstract_html":"<p>The purpose of this study was to examine three means of universal screening to identify students in need of reading interventions at the secondary school level. Specifically the results of the Colorado State Assessment Program (CSAP), the Test of Silent Contextual Reading Fluency (TOSCRF) (Hammill, Wiederholt, & Allen, 2006) and the Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency (TOSWRF) (Mather, Hammill, Allen, & Roberts, 2004) were used to group students in a Response to Intervention Framework of Tier 1 (needing no intervention), Tier 2 (needing intervention) and Tier 3 (needing intensive intervention). Categorization results were compared to determine the accuracy of identification by these screening tools. Analysis of the results indicated a significant difference between the CSAP and each of the other screening tools. Use of state assessment results alone resulted in under identification of students in need of interventions as compared to use of the TOSCRF or TOSWRF. No significant differences by gender across the three tests were seen. A significant difference was seen between the performance of Hispanic students and White students; this, however, could be attributed to the sample size. In addition, no significant interaction effects of gender by Hispanic/White ethnicity were noted for each of the three tests. Finally, no significance was seen within each screening tool by grade; there was, however, significance across the three screening tools by grade. Implications for practice, as well as future research, are discussed.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Layland, Debra Allison"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Ph.D.","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Kent Seidel, Ph.D.","Linda Brookhart","Kathy Green"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2009,"date_issued":"2009-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2009-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:02:45Z","subjects":["Interventions","Reading","Response to intervention","RTI","Screening","Secondary","Educational Administration and Supervision","Secondary Education"],"languages":["en"],"rights":["Copyright is held by the author. User is responsible for all copyright compliance.
"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd/856","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Kent Seidel, Ph.D.","Linda Brookhart","Kathy Green"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Layland, Debra Allison"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2001-01-01T08:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph.D."]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Interventions","Reading","Response to intervention","RTI","Screening","Secondary","Educational Administration and Supervision","Secondary Education"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Copyright is held by the author. User is responsible for all copyright compliance.
"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd/856"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The purpose of this study was to examine three means of universal screening to identify students in need of reading interventions at the secondary school level. Specifically the results of the Colorado State Assessment Program (CSAP), the Test of Silent Contextual Reading Fluency (TOSCRF) (Hammill, Wiederholt, & Allen, 2006) and the Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency (TOSWRF) (Mather, Hammill, Allen, & Roberts, 2004) were used to group students in a Response to Intervention Framework of Tier 1 (needing no intervention), Tier 2 (needing intervention) and Tier 3 (needing intensive intervention). Categorization results were compared to determine the accuracy of identification by these screening tools. Analysis of the results indicated a significant difference between the CSAP and each of the other screening tools. Use of state assessment results alone resulted in under identification of students in need of interventions as compared to use of the TOSCRF or TOSWRF. No significant differences by gender across the three tests were seen. A significant difference was seen between the performance of Hispanic students and White students; this, however, could be attributed to the sample size. In addition, no significant interaction effects of gender by Hispanic/White ethnicity were noted for each of the three tests. Finally, no significance was seen within each screening tool by grade; there was, however, significance across the three screening tools by grade. Implications for practice, as well as future research, are discussed.
"]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Examination of Universal Screening in Response to Intervention at the Secondary Level"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Kent Seidel, Ph.D.","Linda Brookhart","Kathy Green"],"dc:creator":["Layland, Debra Allison"],"dc:date.available":["2001-01-01T08:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["The purpose of this study was to examine three means of universal screening to identify students in need of reading interventions at the secondary school level. Specifically the results of the Colorado State Assessment Program (CSAP), the Test of Silent Contextual Reading Fluency (TOSCRF) (Hammill, Wiederholt, & Allen, 2006) and the Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency (TOSWRF) (Mather, Hammill, Allen, & Roberts, 2004) were used to group students in a Response to Intervention Framework of Tier 1 (needing no intervention), Tier 2 (needing intervention) and Tier 3 (needing intensive intervention). Categorization results were compared to determine the accuracy of identification by these screening tools. Analysis of the results indicated a significant difference between the CSAP and each of the other screening tools. Use of state assessment results alone resulted in under identification of students in need of interventions as compared to use of the TOSCRF or TOSWRF. No significant differences by gender across the three tests were seen. A significant difference was seen between the performance of Hispanic students and White students; this, however, could be attributed to the sample size. In addition, no significant interaction effects of gender by Hispanic/White ethnicity were noted for each of the three tests. Finally, no significance was seen within each screening tool by grade; there was, however, significance across the three screening tools by grade. Implications for practice, as well as future research, are discussed.
"],"dc:format":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier":["https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd/856"],"dc:language":["en"],"dc:rights":["Copyright is held by the author. User is responsible for all copyright compliance.
"],"dc:subject":["Interventions","Reading","Response to intervention","RTI","Screening","Secondary","Educational Administration and Supervision","Secondary Education"],"dc:title":["Examination of Universal Screening in Response to Intervention at the Secondary Level"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph.D."]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:02:45Z"}