Validation of curriculum-based reading passages and comparison of college students with and without dyslexia or ADHD

  • Jason M. NelsonEmail author
  • Will Lindstrom
  • Patricia A. Foels
  • Joanna Lamkin
  • Lucia Dwyer


Although reading is an essential skill for college success, little is known about how college students with and without disabilities read within their actual college curriculum. In the present article, we report on two studies addressing this issue. Within study 1, we developed and validated curriculum-based oral reading fluency measures using a sample of college students without disabilities (N = 125). In study 2, we administered the curriculum-based measures to four groups (each with n = 25): college students without disabilities, college students with dyslexia, college students with ADHD, and a clinical control group. Study 1 results indicated that the curriculum-based measures demonstrated good reliability and criterion validity. Results from study 2 indicated that college students with dyslexia were substantially slower readers than all groups without dyslexia (ds > 1.8). The curriculum-based measures demonstrated high accuracy in classifying participants with dyslexia and with impaired oral reading fluency (area under the curve > .94). Implications for incorporating curriculum-based measures in postsecondary settings are discussed.


ADHD College Curriculum-based measurement Dyslexia Reading 


Compliance with ethical standards

The study was authorized by the Institutional Review Board of the researchers’ university. All participants provided written informed consent.


  1. Baer, J. D., Cook, A. L., & Baldi, S. (2006). The literacy of America’s college students. Washington, DC: American Institues for Research.Google Scholar
  2. Barkley, R. A. (2015). Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment (4th ed.). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  3. Bray, G. B., Pascarella, E. T., & Pierson, C. T. (2004). Postsecondary education and some dimensions of literacy development: An exploration of longitudinal evidence. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(3), 306–330. Scholar
  4. Brown, J. I., Fishco, V. V., & Hanna, G. (1993). Nelson-Denny Reading Test and technical report forms G & H. Chicago, IL: Riverside.Google Scholar
  5. Brueggemann, A. E., Kamphaus, R., & Dombrowski, S. C. (2008). An impairment model of learning disability diagnosis. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 39(4), 424–430. Scholar
  6. Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46.Google Scholar
  7. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. Scholar
  8. Cortiella, C., & Horowitz, S. H. (2014). The state of learning disabilities: Facts, trends, and emerging issues (3rd ed.). New York, NY: National Center for Learning Disabilities.Google Scholar
  9. Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219–232. Scholar
  10. Dombrowski, S. C., Kamphaus, R. W., & Reynolds, C. R. (2004). After the demise of the discrepancy: Proposed learning disabilities diagnostic criteria. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 35(4), 364–372. Scholar
  11. Flippo, R. F., & Schumm, J. S. (2009). Reading tests. In R. F. Flippo & D. C. Caverly (Eds.), Handbook of college reading and study strategy research (2nd ed., pp. 408–432). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Frazier, T. W., Youngstrom, E. A., Glutting, J. J., & Watkins, M. W. (2007). ADHD and achievement: Meta-analysis of the child, adolescent, and adult literatures and a concomitant study with college students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40(1), 49–65.
  13. Frazier, T. W., Frazier, A. R., Busch, R. M., Kerwood, M. A., & Demaree, H. A. (2008). Detection of simulated ADHD and reading disorder using symptom validity measures. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 23, 501–509. Scholar
  14. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 239–256. Scholar
  15. Gickling, E. E., & Armstrong, D. L. (1978). Levels of instructional difficulty as related to on-task behavior, task completion, and comprehension. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 11, 559–566. Scholar
  16. Guilford, J. P., & Fruchter, B. (1978). Fundamental statistics in psychology and education (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  17. Hanley, J. A., & McNeil, B. J. (1983). A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology, 148, 839–843. Scholar
  18. Harrison, A. G., & Armstrong, I. (2014). WISC-IV unusual digit span performance in a sample of adolescents with learning disabilities. Applied Neuropsychology, Child, 3(2), 152–160. Scholar
  19. Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. (2017). An update to compiled ORF norms (technical report no. 1702). Eugene, OR, Behavioral Research and Teaching, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
  20. Hintze, J. M., Christ, T. J., & Methe, S. A. (2006). Curriculum-based assessment. Psychology in the Schools, 43(1), 45–56. Scholar
  21. January, S. A., Ardoin, S. P., Christ, T. J., Eckert, T. L., & White, M. J. (2016). Evaluating the interpretations and use of curriculum-based measurement in reading and word lists for universal screening in first and second grade. School Psychology Review, 45(3), 310–326. Scholar
  22. Jasinski, L. J., Berry, D. T. R., Shandera, A. L., & Clark, J. A. (2011). Use of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Digit Span subtest for malingering detection: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 33(3), 300–314. Scholar
  23. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87(4), 329–354. Scholar
  24. LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323. Scholar
  25. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174. Scholar
  26. Lefly, D. L., & Pennington, B. F. (1991). Spelling errors and reading fluency in compensated adult dyslexics. Annals of Dyslexia, 41(1), 141–162. Scholar
  27. Lefly, D. L., & Pennington, B. F. (2000). Reliability and validity of the Adult Reading History Questionnaire. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 286–296. Scholar
  28. Lewandowski, L., Gathje, R. A., Lovett, B. J., & Gordon, M. (2013). Test-taking skills in college students with and without ADHD. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 31(1), 41–52. Scholar
  29. Lewandowski, L. J., Codding, R. S., Kleinmann, A. E., & Tucker, K. L. (2003). Assessment of reading rate in postsecondary students. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 21, 134–144. Scholar
  30. Linn, R. L., Harnisch, D. L., & Dunbar, S. B. (1981). Corrections for range restriction: An empirical investigation of conditions resulting in conservative corrections. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66(6), 655–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lyon, G. R., Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2003). A definition of dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 53, 1–14. Scholar
  32. McGrew, K. S., Shrank, F. A., & Woodcock, R. W. (2007). Woodcock-Johnson III Normative Update technical manual. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside.Google Scholar
  33. Miller, C. J., Miller, S. R., Bloom, J. S., Jones, L., Lindstrom, W., et al. (2006). Testing the double-deficit hypothesis in an adult sample. Annals of Dyslexia, 56(1), 83–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Miller, L. A., Lewandowski, L. J., & Antshel, K. M. (2015). Effects of extended time for college students with and without ADHD. Journal of Attention Disorders, 19(8). 678–686.
  35. Newman, L., Wagner, M., Knokey, A. M., Marder, C., Nagle, K., Shaver, D., … Schwarting, M. (2011). The post-high school outcomes of young adults with disabilities up to 8 years after high school. A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Retrieved from
  36. Obuchowski, N. A. (2005). ROC analysis. American Journal of Roentgenology, 184(2), 364–372. Scholar
  37. Pennington, B. F., McGrath, L. M., & Peterson, R. L. (2019). Diagnosing learning disorders: From science to practice (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  38. Reschly, A. L., Busch, T. W., Betts, J., Deno, S. L., & Long, J. D. (2009). Curriculum-based measurement oral reading as an indicator of reading achievement: A meta-analysis of the correlational evidence. Journal of School Psychology, 47, 427–469. Scholar
  39. Sackett, P. R., & Yang, H. (2000). Correction for range restriction: An expanded typology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 112–118. Scholar
  40. Sattler, J. M., & Ryan, J. J. (2009). Assessment with the WAIS-IV. San Diego: Jerome M. Sattler, Publisher, Inc..Google Scholar
  41. Schroeder, R. W., Twumasi-Ankrah, P., Baade, L. E., & Marshall, P. S. (2012). Reliable digit span: A systematic review and cross-validation study. Assessment, 19(1), 21–30. Scholar
  42. Shapiro, E. S. (2004). Academic skills problems: Direct assessment and intervention (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  43. Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2005). Dyslexia (specific reading disability). Biological Psychiatry, 57, 1301–1309. Scholar
  44. Stanovich, K. E. (1999). The sociopsychometrics of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32(4), 350–361. Scholar
  45. Swets, J. A. (1996). Signal detection theory and ROC analysis in psychology and diagnosis: Collected papers. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  46. Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (2012). Test of Word Reading Efficiency, Second Edition and examiner’s manual. Austin, TX: PRO-ED, Inc..Google Scholar
  47. U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2009). Higher education and disability: Education needs a coordinated approach to improve its assistance to schools in supporting students. Retrieved from
  48. U.S. Department of Education. (2014). Profile of undergraduate students: 2011–12. Retrieved May 30, 2018, from
  49. U.S. Department of Education. (2015). The nation’s report card. Retrieved May 30, 2018, from
  50. U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Digest of education statistics: 2016. Retrieved May 30. 2018, from
  51. Valentine, J. C., Konstantopoulos, S., & Goldrick-Rab, S. (2017). What happens to students placed in developmental education? A meta-analysis of regression discontinuity studies. Review of Educational Research, 87(4), 806–833. Scholar
  52. Webb, N. M., Shavelson, R. J., & Haertel, E. H. (2006). Reliability coefficients and generalizability theory. In C. R. Rao & S. Sinharay (Eds.), Handbook of statistics (Vol. 26, pp. 81–124). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  53. Wechsler, D. (2008). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Fourth Edition. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.Google Scholar
  54. Willcutt, E. G., Pennington, B. F., Olson, R. K., & DeFries, J. C. (2007). Understanding comorbidity: A twin study of reading disability and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 144, 709–714. Scholar
  55. Woodcock, R. W. (2011). Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests Third Edition and examiner’s manual. Bloomington, MN: Pearson.Google Scholar
  56. Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., Shrank, F. A., & Mather, N. (2007). Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement Normative Update. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside.Google Scholar
  57. Youngstrom, E. A. (2014). A primer on receiver operating characteristic analysis and diagnostic efficiency statistics for pediatric psychology: We are ready to ROC. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 39(2), 204–221. Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Dyslexia Association 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jason M. Nelson
    • 1
    Email author
  • Will Lindstrom
    • 1
  • Patricia A. Foels
    • 1
  • Joanna Lamkin
    • 1
  • Lucia Dwyer
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Georgia Regents’ Center for Learning DisordersAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations