DIBELS Next

DAZE 

Rating Summary

Classification Accuracyfull bubble
GeneralizabilityBroad
Reliabilityfull bubble
Validityempty bubble
Disaggregated Reliability and Validity Dataempty bubble
Efficiency
AdministrationIndividual Group
Administration & Scoring Time3-6 Minutes
Scoring KeyComputer Scored
Benchmarks / NormsYes
Cost Technology, Human Resources, and Accommodations for Special Needs Service and Support Purpose and Other Implementation Information Usage and Reporting

DMG: Materials may be downloaded at no cost from DMG at http://dibels.org/next. Minimal reproduction costs associated with printing.

Amplify: The basic pricing plan is an annual per student license of $14.90. For users already using an mCLASS assessment product, the cost per student to add mCLASS:DIBELS Next is $6 per student. 

Voyager Sopris: There are three purchasing options for implementing Progress Monitoring materials in Year 1:

1) Progress Monitoring via Online Test Administration and Scoring

2) Progress Monitoring materials as part of the purchase of Classroom Sets, which also include Benchmark materials and DIBELS Next Survey

3) Individual Progress Monitoring materials.

DIBELS Next Classroom Sets contain everything needed for one person to conduct the Benchmark Assessment for 25 students and the Progress Monitoring Assessment for up to five students. These easy-to-implement kits simplify the distribution and organization of DIBELS Next materials.

Testers will require 4-8 hours of training. Examiners must at a minimum be a paraprofessional.

Training manuals and materials are field tested and are included in the cost of the tool.

DMG: Customer Support is available from 8:00am to 5:00pm PST, Monday through Friday by phone, email, or through DMG's website.

Voyager Sopris: 8:00am to 6:00pm CST, Monday through Friday by phone, email, or through the Voyager Sopris website.

Amplify: Customer Care Center offers complete user-level support from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. EST, Monday through Friday. Customers may contact a customer support representative via telephone, e-mail, or electronically through the mCLASS website. Additionally, customers have self-service access to instructions, documents, and frequently asked questions on our Website.  The research staff and product teams are available to answer questions about the content within the assessments.

Accommodations:

DIBELS Next is an assessment instrument well-suited for use with capturing the developing reading skills of special education students learning to read, with a few exceptions: a) students who are deaf; b) students who have fluency-based speech disabilities, e.g., stuttering, oral apraxia; c) students who are learning to read in a language other than English or Spanish; d) students with severe disabilities.  Use of DIBELS Next is appropriate for all other students, including those in special education for whom reading connected text is an IEP goal. For students receiving special education, it may be necessary to adjust goals and timelines. Approved accommodations are available in the administration manual.

Where to obtain:

DMG
859 Willamette Street, Suite 320, Eugene, OR 97401
541-431-6931
(888) 943-1240
http://dibels.org

Amplify Education, Inc.
55 Washington Street, Suite 900
Brooklyn, NY 11201
1-800-823-1969, option 1
www.amplify.com

Voyager Sopris
17855 Dallas Parkway, Suite 400, Dallas, TX 75287-6816 (888)399-1995
http://www.voyagersopris.com

DIBELS Next measures are brief, powerful indicators of foundational early literacy skills that: are quick to administer and score; serve as universal screening (or benchmark assessment) and progress monitoring; identify students in need of intervention support; evaluate the effectiveness of interventions; and support the RtI/Multi-tiered model. DIBELS Next comprises six measures: First Sound Fluency (FSF), Letter Naming Fluency (LNF), Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF), Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF), DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency (DORF), and Daze. 

Daze is the standardized DIBELS version of maze procedures for measuring reading comprehension. The purpose of a maze procedure is to measure the reasoning processes that constitute comprehension. Specifically, Daze assesses the student’s ability to construct meaning from text using word recognition skills, background information and prior knowledge, familiarity with linguistic properties such as syntax and morphology, and reasoning skills.

Administration time is 3 minutes per student with 0-3 minutes of additional scoring time and can be individually or group administered.

Assessor asks students to read a passage and circle the word that makes the most sense in the story. Score:  Number of correct responses, adjusted for guessing. Number of correct words in 3 minutes minus half the number of incorrect words.

Raw scores are provided as the reading level of the student. Cut Points for each proficiency level are provided. Developmental benchmarks for each measure, grade, and time of year (beginning, middle, end) report each score as Above Proficient, Proficient, Below Proficient, Far Below Proficient.

 

Classification Accuracy

Primary Sample #1

 

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

False Positive Rate

0.18

0.33

0.30

0.06

False Negative Rate

0.35

0.28

0.20

0.47

Sensitivity

0.65

0.72

0.80

0.53

Specificity

0.82

0.67

0.70

0.94

Positive Predictive Power

0.58

0.54

0.55

0.64

Negative Predictive Power

0.86

0.82

0.89

0.91

Overall Classification Rate

0.78

0.69

0.73

0.87

AUC (ROC)

0.87

0.78

0.84

0.80

Base Rate

0.27

0.35

0.31

0.17

Cut Points:

11

17

20

19

At 90% Sensitivity, Specificity equals

0.69

0.41

0.59

0.41

At 80% Sensitivity, Specificity equals

0.74

0.53

0.70

0.56

At 70% Sensitivity, Specificity equals

0.80

0.67

0.83

0.65

Primary Sample #2

Classification Accuracy in Predicting Proficiency on GRADE™ (Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation)

 

3rd Grade

n = 187

4th Grade

n = 185

5th Grade

n = 194

6th Grade

n = 102

False Positive Rate

0.23

0.38

0.38

0.11

False Negative Rate

0.17

0.15

0.10

0.43

Sensitivity

0.83

0.85

0.90

0.57

Specificity

0.77

0.62

0.62

0.89

Positive Predictive Power

0.33

0.33

0.30

0.29

Negative Predictive Power

0.97

0.95

0.97

0.97

Overall Classification Rate

0.78

0.66

0.66

0.87

AUC (ROC)

0.90

0.85

0.87

0.80

Base Rate

0.12

0.18

0.15

0.07

Cut Points:

7

12

13

14

At 90% Sensitivity, Specificity equals

0.69

0.53

0.56

0.47

At 80% Sensitivity, Specificity equals

0.79

0.66

0.69

0.54

At 70% Sensitivity, Specificity equals

0.90

0.82

0.88

0.85

Cross Validation Study #1

Classification Accuracy in Predicting Proficiency on the California State Standards Test

 

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

False Positive Rate

0.25

0.36

0.46

0.09

False Negative Rate

0.39

0.16

0.10

0.44

Sensitivity

0.61

0.84

0.90

0.56

Specificity

0.75

0.64

0.54

0.91

Positive Predictive Power

0.61

0.41

0.42

0.63

Negative Predictive Power

0.74

0.93

0.94

0.88

Overall Classification Rate

0.69

0.69

0.64

0.83

AUC (ROC)

0.77

0.81

0.83

0.86

Base Rate

0.40

0.23

0.27

0.22

Cut Points:

11

17

20

19

At 90% Sensitivity, Specificity equals

0.43

0.50

0.54

0.61

At 80% Sensitivity, Specificity equals

0.59

0.67

0.72

0.75

At 70% Sensitivity, Specificity equals

0.68

0.74

0.81

0.82

Cross-Validation Study #2

Classification Accuracy in Predicting Proficiency on the CSTs (STAR program)

 

3rd Grade

n = 1,213

4th Grade

n = 1,157

5th Grade

n = 1,205

6th Grade

n = 558

False Positive Rate

0.33

0.44

0.54

0.16

False Negative Rate

0.17

0.09

0.03

0.07

Sensitivity

0.83

0.91

0.97

0.93

Specificity

0.67

0.56

0.46

0.84

Positive Predictive Power

0.28

0.16

0.16

0.23

Negative Predictive Power

0.96

0.99

0.99

0.99

Overall Classification Rate

0.69

0.59

0.51

0.85

AUC (ROC)

0.84

0.85

0.84

0.96

Base Rate

0.14

0.08

0.10

0.05

Cut Points:

7

12

13

14

At 90% Sensitivity, Specificity equals

0.56

0.60

0.62

0.90

At 80% Sensitivity, Specificity equals

0.69

0.76

0.74

0.93

At 70% Sensitivity, Specificity equals

0.79

0.85

0.80

0.94

 

Generalizability

Description of study sample:

·         Number of States: 5 (Iowa, Minnesota, Ohio, Oregon, California)

·         Size: 1,306

·         Regions: Divisions 3 and 4 (North Central Midwest) and Division 9 (Pacific West), according to the US Census Bureau

·         SES: 16% Free/Reduced Lunch Rate (according to NCES data aggregated at the school level)

·         Race/Ethnicity (according to NCES data aggregated at the school level)

o   94% White, Non-Hispanic

o   <1% American Indian/Alaska Native

o   <1% Black, Non-Hispanic

o   <1% Asian, Pacific Islander

o   4% Hispanic

Description of cross validation study sample #1:

·         Number of States: 1 (California)

·         Size:

o   2nd grade = 1,177

o   3rd grade = 1,216

o   4th grade = 1,155

o   5th grade = 1,205

o   6th grade = 606

·         Regions: Division 9, West (according to US Census Bureau)

Description of cross-validation study sample #2:

·         Number of States: 1

·         Regions: Division 9 (West), according to US Census Bureau

·         SES: 31% Eligible for free or reduced-price lunch

·         Race/Ethnicity:

o   46% White, Non-Hispanic

o   38% Hispanic

 

 

Reliability

Type of Reliability

Age or Grade

n (range)

Coefficient

SEM

Information (including normative data)/Subjects

range

median

Alternate-Form

3-6

40-61

0.75-0.83

0.81

2.95-4.68

Participants included students in third through fifth grade from twenty-two schools across five states

Inter-rater

3-6

20-26

0.98-0.99

0.99

NA

Participants included students in third through fifth grade from twenty-two schools across five states

 

Validity

Type of Validity

Age or Grade

Test or Criterion

n (range)

Coefficient (if applicable)

Information (including normative data)/Subjects

range

Median

Content 3-6         The Daze passages were designed to represent the different types of text that students will encounter, including a mix of narrative and expository, with different types of passages and content within those categories. A range of topics and themes was selected so that each student would encounter familiar topics and unfamiliar topics. The passages were designed to be authentic text, so they include irregular words and are not written entirely in decodable text. Passages were written and revised by professional authors according to the design specifica­tions available on pages 33 - 34 of the DIBELS Next Technical Manual.
Construct 3-6 Calfornia State Test 607-1,205 0.53-0.65 0.61 Construct validity was computed by calculating the correlation between Daze and the CST using data collected from the 2010-2011 school year. The district is comprised of 38% Hispanic or Latino; 31% subsidized lunch; 20% English Language Learner.
Predictive 3-6 GRADE 103-194 0.61-0.68 0.64 Participants included students in third through sixth grade from thirteen schools across five states.

Construct

3

ISTEP+ ELA

3,814

 

0.71

Validity was computed using data from school year 2011-2012. 14% African American, 12% Hispanic, 4% Asian, 7% Multi-race; 16% subsidized lunch; 8% special education; 10% English as second language.

Concurrent

3-6

GRADE Total Test

103-194

0.64-0.68

0.67

 

 

Disaggregated Reliability, Validity, and Classification Data for Diverse Populations

Disaggregated Classification Accuracy

Classification Accuracy in Predicting Proficiency on the DIBELS Grade 3 BOY to Grade 3 Indiana Statewide Testing for Educational Progress Plus Test in English Language Arts

Cross-Validation

Overall

White

Black

Hispanic

False Positive Rate

0.06

0.04

0.12

0.08

False Negative Rate

0.64

0.70

0.56

0.63

Sensitivity

0.36

0.30

0.44

0.37

Specificity

0.94

0.96

0.88

0.92

Positive Predictive Power

0.77

0.77

0.79

0.78

Negative Predictive Power

0.73

0.77

0.61

0.65

Overall Classification Rate

0.74

0.77

0.66

0.67

AUC (ROC)

0.75

0.77

0.70

0.71

Base Rate

0.35

0.29

0.50

0.44

Cut Points:

8

8

8

8

At 90% Sensitivity, Specificity equals

1.23

1.21

1.34

1.34

At 80% Sensitivity, Specificity equals

1.18

1.17

1.24

1.26

At 70% Sensitivity, Specificity equals

1.23

1.13

1.14

1.18

 

Disaggregated Validity

 

Type of Validity

Age or Grade

 

Test or Criterion

n (range)

Coefficient (if applicable)

 

Information (including normative data)/Subjects

range

median

Concurrent Validity (Caucasian)

3

ISTEP+ ELA

2,028

 

0.70

Validity was computed using data from school year 2011-2012. 16% subsidized lunch; 8% special education; 10% English as second language.

Concurrent Validity (African American)

3

ISTEP+ ELA

547

 

0.67

Validity was computed using data from school year 2011-2012. 16% subsidized lunch; 8% special education; 10% English as second language.

Concurrent Validity (Hispanic)

3

ISTEP+ ELA

451

 

0.67

Validity was computed using data from school year 2011-2012. 16% subsidized lunch; 8% special education; 10% English as second language.