Comparing Traditional and Virtual Assessment of Oral Reading Fluency: A Preliminary Investigation

Given the shift toward technology-based approaches to assessment and intervention and the growing popularity of virtual service delivery, practitioners must have data to inform whether student performance on curriculum-based measures (CBMs) is equivalent when administering assessments through different modalities. Reading CBMs are a widely used tool for benchmarking and monitoring student progress, but researchers have not thoroughly examined variations on CBM assessment modality (e.g., tablets, computers, video conferencing). The current study extends the research on CBM assessment modalities by comparing students' oral reading fluency (ORF) scores across traditional (face-to-face, with paper probes) and virtual (via video conferencing, with probes presented on screen share) assessment sessions. Results from four students, using an alternating treatment design, show slight differences between modalities with traditional face-to-face administration yielding higher scores. Assessment integrity and interscorer agreement data were collected. Discussion focuses on limitations, directions for future research, and considerations for practitioners.