1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Literature on Reading Ages

Discussion in 'Primary' started by TopherB17, Nov 13, 2011.

  1. Hello,
    After a seach on the internet and a browse on the forum, I cannot find what I am looking for and am hoping somebody can help. I am wanting detailed information about what type of words a child should be able to read at what age.
    For example (this is not accurate - just an example of the level of detail)
    5 yrs - monosyllabic words, without constant blends. Mainly simple sentences.
    6yrs - some words with 2/3 syllables. Constanant blends "ch", "sh". Simple and compound sentences
    etc...
    Preferably up to the age of 15.
    This document may not exist but test like the Salford must base it on a study.
    Any information, would be gratefully received.
    Thank you.
    Chris
     
  2. Hello,
    After a seach on the internet and a browse on the forum, I cannot find what I am looking for and am hoping somebody can help. I am wanting detailed information about what type of words a child should be able to read at what age.
    For example (this is not accurate - just an example of the level of detail)
    5 yrs - monosyllabic words, without constant blends. Mainly simple sentences.
    6yrs - some words with 2/3 syllables. Constanant blends "ch", "sh". Simple and compound sentences
    etc...
    Preferably up to the age of 15.
    This document may not exist but test like the Salford must base it on a study.
    Any information, would be gratefully received.
    Thank you.
    Chris
     
  3. Reading age tests reflect what children have been taught, which, while it is a reflection of what words they can read isn't necessarily a reflection of what they can do in the way you describe.
    Most word reading tests seem to reflect the teaching of HFWs which has been a key element of reading instruction for several decades. As these don't systematically cover any progression in word 'difficulty' they won't tell you much!
    Bearing that in mind, I think you might find some information in the handbooks of the various tests. I am pretty sure that my handbook of the NFER Group Reading test goes into some detail about the development of the test and its standardisation.
    (BTW it is a 'consonant')
     
  4. Up to the age of 15? It was once, (pre NC), the general practice to use RA tests in KS2, but except for SEN, these were comprehension passages, based on completing a missing word from a passage, (cloze procedure) not word recognition, ie Schonell "B" was widely used which gave RA up to about 13 years 7 months. I doubt if there is a word recognition type RA test which gives reading ages up to 15.
     
  5. Did a web search and found 33% of schools similar in size to mine used the Schonell Silent Reading Test B, this was at the time of the Bullock report.


    http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/bullock/bullock25b-table39.htm
     
  6. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    The Burt Reading test goes up to 14 y 3 m
    I think salford only goes to 10.6
    but reading ages are notoriously unreliable because each commercial test, tests different things - words, sentences, comprehension ...
     
  7. Bringing back memories, this is what we used to calculate the reading age or readability of the texts we used, ie assigning library books:


    http://www.cimt.plymouth.ac.uk/resources/topical/reading/reading.htm


    I would think that specific word/sound recognition tests will have been standardised around their own research, and that information would come with the tests.
     
  8. Here is an Australian compilation, Burt Word recognition test goes up to 13:


    http://www.maccs.mq.edu.au/ddoll/r_tests.htm


    Investigating each might reveal web information
     
  9. It also occurs to me that if you are looking for information on what children are physically able to 'say' (so influencing the order of introduction of phonemes and combinations of consonants) in the early stages of reading you could need to look at some literature on speech therapy and the development of spoken language.
    The Burt single word reading test goes up to age 12. I would have thought that, in a perfect world, children should have mastered all aspects of word reading by then! But this test was restandardisedin 1974, so goodness knows when it was originally devised. It has a great many high frequency words in its first 50 words.
     
  10. Oh, msz, snap!
    I just happen to have a copy of the 1974 handbook right here and it only appears to go up to RA 12. However, that is on a score of 90 words correct, and I'm sure that it actually contains 100 words. Very odd...
     
  11. This is a web address for Burt's Word Recognition Test, with a table of norms:


    http://www.syntheticphonics.com/burtreadingtestpage.htm


    The table of norms:


    http://www.syntheticphonics.com/Burtreadingtestonweb.pdf


    Don't know if any of this is useful in the modern day, but maybe it gives a sense of matching words to ages
     
  12. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

  13. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    To be fair to Burt I don't think the 110 word version is his work [​IMG]
     
  14. I also have a copy of Daniels and Diack (st pub 1958) which explains, better than I did, why reading tests aren't very useful for determining the skills listed by the OP.
    They have this to say about word reading tests
     
  15. In KS2, I liked, at the time, the comprehension based reading ages, which did seem to correlate with the reading materials they were able to handle. We only used word recognition tests in KS2, if a child was very far behind the norm.
     
  16. But the OP was asking specifically about words, not comprehension, yes? [​IMG]
     
  17. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    Yes
     
  18. Yes, but I like to occasional digress, as do many posters on many threads. If it had been a test, I'd have kept to subject.
     
  19. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    I think I mentioned comprehension earlier I hadn't realised you had too
     

Share This Page