STEEP

Oral Reading Fluency

Rating Summary

Classification Accuracyfull bubble
GeneralizabilityModerate High
Reliabilityfull bubble
Validityhalf bubble
Disaggregated Reliability and Validity DataN A
Efficiency
AdministrationIndividual
Administration & Scoring Time1 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

Annual Cost per Student:
STEEP assessments are included with iSTEEP data management system site license subscription.  

$3.00 per student. 

Assessments can also be purchased separately from the data management system. Sets are packaged by grade level in packages of 50 probes.  Cost is $0.41 per student for the first year, $0.20 per student for subsequent years.

iSTEEP Measure Sets:  $10 per package of 50.

Administration manuals are included in an assessment kit and are also sold separately.

Internet access is required for full use of product services.

Assessors require 1 – 4 hours of training.

Paraprofessionals can administer the assessment.

Most accommodations normally afforded students (e.g., visual screens, etc) are allowed with the exception of additional time for completion. Words that are read incorrectly because of dialectical, articulation, or foreign language issues are not considered as errors. Alternate forms available in Spanish.

iSTEEP
2627 S. Bayshore Drive
Suite 1105
Miami, FL 33133
www.isteep.com
www.isteeplearning.com

Tech Support:
Support@isteep.com
Training

Assessment follows typical CBM procedures and external training is usually not needed.  Self training using directions and the manual provide all implementation information.

If desired, three forms of training are available: on-site training, web seminars, and web-based e-learning.

Ongoing technical support is available from professionals with RTI expertise though email and phone.

The iSTEEP screening process is one component of the STEEP RTI process which also includes procedures for progress monitoring, a standard protocol for determining the specific intervention needed, and diagnostic feedback based upon progress monitoring to determine whether the appropriate interventions are in place. The screening component is designed to be used as part of the STEEP RTI process but can also be used with other RTI models.

Within the STEEP RTI process, screening is followed by 2 brief assessments for purposes of intervention planning.  These assessments increase screening accuracy and are designed (a) to determine if the student scored low because of motivational issues and (b) to analyze skills present and not present. 

Administration of the assessment takes 1 minute per student and is individually administered.

Raw, percentile, and benchmark scores are available. Raw scores are calculated by subtracting the number of errors from the total words read in one minute.

Reports are easy to interpret and teachers can easily see which students need and don’t need intervention. Across the year, for each benchmarking period, the data system actively analyzes several indicators of student progress and provides clear and direct feedback about student rate of improvement using graphs and written descriptions. This allows easy review of students whose scores are low and/or whose progress is slow (i.e., those who are dually discrepant). 

Data can be aggregated by school, teacher, NCLB subgroups and other important variables. Norming for student level and rate of progress,  by school and district, are built into the system. 

 

Classification Accuracy

Classification Accuracy in Predicting Proficiency on the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Word Identification (grades 1-2), and the Louisiana State Accountability Assessment (grades 3-5)
  1st grade
n=68
2nd grade
n=70
3rd grade
n=63
4th grade
n=198
5th grade
n=73
False Positive Rate 0.19 0.09 0.24 0.10 0.21
False Negative Rate 0.2 0.25 0.31 0.38 0.35
Sensitivity 0.8 0.75 0.69 0.63 0.65
Specificity 0.81 0.91 0.76 0.90 0.79
Positive Predictive Power 0.55 0.64 0.43 0.56 0.48
Negative Predictive Power 0.93 0.95 0.90 0.93 0.88
Overall Classification Rate 0.22 0.17 0.21 0.16 0.23
AUC (ROC) 0.92 0.91 0.91 0.87 0.85
Base Rate 0.22 0.17 0.21 0.16 0.23

 

Generalizability

Classification Accuracy Study
Study 1. Description of study sample

  • Date: 2006 - 2007
  • Number of States:  1
  • Size: 622
  • Region: South
  • Gender:
    • 49% Male
    • 51% Female
  • SES: 64% eligible for free or reduced-price lunch
  • Race/Ethnicity:
    • 55% White, Non-Hispanic
    • 34% Black, Non-Hispanic
    • 4% Hispanic
    • 7% Asian/Pacific Islander

Study 2. Description of study sample

  • Date: 2006 - 2007
  • Number of States: 1
  • Size: 452
  • Region: South
  • SES: 59% eligible for free or reduced-price lunch
  • Race/Ethnicity:
    • 57% White, Non-Hispanic
    • 41% Black, Non-Hispanic
    • 1% Hispanic
    • <1% American Indian/Alaska Native
    • <1%Asian/Pacific Islander

Cross Validation Study Description of study sample

  • Date: 2006-2007
  • Number of States: 1
  • Size: 785
  • Region: Southeast
  • Gender:
    • 47% Male
    • 52% Female  
  • SES: 68% eligible for free or reduced-price lunch
  • Race/Ethnicity:
    • 54% White, Non-Hispanic
    • 41% Black, Non-Hispanic
    • 1% Hispanic
    • 3% Asian/Pacific Islander
    • 1% Other

Reliability

Type of Reliability Age or Grade n (range) Coefficient SEM
Range Median
Inter-scorer Grades 1-5 74 Pairs of Scorers 0.92    
Test-retest Grades 1-5 203(approx 40 students per grade) 0.91-0.95 0.93 7.6 to 10.3  
Alternate Forms Grades 1-5 207 0.83-0.88 0.84  

 

Validity

Type of Validity Age or Grade Test or Criterion n(range) Coefficient
Range Median
Predictive First GRADE 30 0.73  
Predictive Grade 2-5 MCT 622 0.59 to 0.85 0.76
Concurrent Fifth iLeap 117 0.68  
Predictive Second SAT-9 114 0.61  
Predictive Fourth Iowa Test of Basic Skills 276 0.64  
Concurrent Grades 1, 2, 4 WRMT Word Identification 177 0.71 to 0.76 0.73
Predictive First WRMT Total Reading Short 82 0.83