FAST

earlyReading Composite

Cost

Technology, Human Resources, and Accommodations for Special Needs

Service and Support

Purpose and Other Implementation Information

Usage and Reporting

Initial Cost:

FAST™ assessments are accessed through an annual subscription offered by FastBridge Learning, priced on a “per student assessed” model. The subscription rate for school year 2017–18 is $7.00 per student. There are no additional fixed costs. FAST subscriptions are all inclusive providing access to: all FAST reading and math assessments for universal screening, progress monitoring and diagnostic purposes including Computer Adaptive Testing and Curriculum-Based Measurement; Behavior and Developmental Milestones assessment tools; the FAST data management and reporting system; embedded online system training for staff; and basic implementation and user support.

 

In addition to the online training modules embedded within the FAST application, FastBridge Learning offers onsite training options. One-, two-, and three-day packages are available. Packages are determined by implementation size and which FAST assessments (e.g., reading, math, and/or behavior) a district intends to use: 1-day package: $3,000.00; 2-day package: $6,000.00; 3-day package: $9,000.00. Any onsite training purchase also includes a complimentary online Admin/Manager training session (2 hours) for users who will be designated as District Managers and/or School Managers in FAST. Additionally, FastBridge offers web-based consultation and training delivered by certified FAST trainers. The web-based consultation and training rate is $200.00/hour.

 

Replacement Cost:

Annual rates subject to change.

 

Included in Cost:

The FAST™ application is a fully cloud-based system, and therefore computer and Internet access are required for full use of the application. Teachers will require less than one hour of training on the administration of the assessment. A paraprofessional can administer the assessment as a Group Proctor in the FAST application.

 

 

Technology Requirements:

  • Computer or tablet
  • Internet connection

 

Training Requirements:

  • Less than 1 hour of training

 

Qualified Administrators:

No minimum qualifications

 

Accommodations:

 The application allows for the following accommodations to support accessibility for culturally and linguistically diverse populations:

  • Enlarged and printed paper materials are available upon request.
  • Extended time in untimed portions of earlyReading.
  • Extra breaks as needed.
  • Preferential seating and use of quiet space.
  • Proxy responses.
  • Use of scratch paper.
  • As part of item development, all items were reviewed for bias and fairness.

 

Where to Obtain:

Website: www.fastbridge.org

Address: 520 Nicollet Mall, Suite 910, Minneapolis, MN 55402

Phone number: 612.254.2534

Email address: info@fastbridge.org

 


Access to Technical Support:

Users have access to professional development technicians, as well as ongoing technical support.

FAST™ earlyReading is an evidence-based assessment used to screen and monitor student progress. Typically administered in grades PreK-1, they may be used for screening up through grade 3 and for frequent progress monitoring at any grade.  Each assessment is designed to be highly efficient and inform instruction. The FAST™ earlyReading assessments are comprised of 12 sub-tests. Of those sub-tests, FastBridge Learning recommends a composite of four specific sub-tests to be given per benchmark period. The composite varies from fall, winter, or spring, per grade level to best match reading skill development and reliably assess risk. The composite is typically completed in 5-10 minutes per student. The remaining assessments may be used as needed to further evaluate skill deficits. Results help identify student risk while informing instruction.

 

Assessment Format:

  • One-to-one

 

Administration Time:

  • 5-10 minutes per student

 

Scoring Time:

  • 5 minutes per student

 

Scoring Method:

Each FAST™ earlyReading subtest produces a raw score. The primary score for each subtest is the number of items correct and/or the number of items correct per minute. These raw scores are used to generate percentile ranks. The best estimate of students’ early literacy skills is the FAST™ earlyReading composite score. The composite score consists of multiple subtest scores administered during a universal screening period. The FAST™ earlyReading composite scores were developed as optimal predictors of spring broad reading achievement in Kindergarten and First Grade. A selected set of individual subtest scores were weighted to optimize the predictive relationship between FAST™ earlyReading and broad reading achievement scores. The weighting is specific to each season. It is important to emphasize that the weighting is influenced by the possible score range and the value of the skill. For example, letter sounds is an important skill with a score range of 0 to 60 or more sounds per minute. This represents a broad range of possible scores with benchmark scores that are fairly high (e.g., benchmarks for fall, winter, and spring might be 10, 28, and 42, respectively). In contrast, Concepts of Print has a score range from 0 to 12 and benchmarks are relatively low in value (e.g., benchmarks for fall and winter might be 8 and 11, respectively). As a result of both the score range and the relative value of Concepts of Print to overall early reading performance, the subtest score is more heavily weighted in the composite score.

 

The composite score for Kindergarten students in the fall includes Concepts of Print, Onset Sounds, Letter Sounds, and Letter Naming. The composite score for winter includes Onset Sounds, Letter Sounds, Word Segmenting and Nonsense Words. Finally, for spring of the Kindergarten year, the following subtests are recommended in order to compute an interpretable composite score: Letter Sounds, Word Segmenting, Nonsense Words, and Sight Words (50). The Decodable Words score may be used in place of Nonsense Words for computing any of the composite scores specified.

 

The composite score for First Grade students in the fall includes Word Segmenting, Nonsense Words, Sight Words (150), and Sentence Reading. The composite score for winter includes Word Segmenting, Nonsense Words, Sight Words (150), and CBMreading. Finally, for spring of First Grade, the following subtests are recommended in order to compute an interpretable composite score: Word Segmenting, Nonsense Words, Sight Words (150), and CBMreading. The Decodable Words score may be used in place of Nonsense Words for computing any of the composite scores specified.

 

Scores Generated:

  • Raw score
  • Percentile score
  • Developmental benchmarks
  • Composite scores
  • Subscale/subtest scores

 

Classification Accuracy

GradeK1
Criterion 1 Falldashdash
Criterion 1 Winterdashdash
Criterion 1 SpringFull bubbleFull bubble
Criterion 2 Falldashdash
Criterion 2 Winterdashdash
Criterion 2 Springdashdash

Primary Sample

 

Criterion 1: GRADE

Time of Year: Spring

 

Grade K

Grade 1

Cut points

52 (15th percentile)

45 (15th percentile)

Base rate in the sample for children requiring intensive intervention

0.08

0.07

Base rate in the sample for children considered at-risk, including those with the most intensive needs

Unknown

Unknown

False Positive Rate

0.12

0.10

False Negative Rate

0.13

0.11

Sensitivity

0.88

0.89

Specificity

0.88

0.90

Positive Predictive Power

0.37

0.42

Negative Predictive Power

0.99

0.99

Overall Classification Rate

0.88

0.90

Area Under the Curve (AUC)

0.95

0.99

95% Confidence Interval Lower

0.93

0.99

95% Confidence Interval Upper

0.97

1.00

At 90% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.88

0.99

At 80% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.91

0.99

At 70% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.94

0.99

 

Reliability

GradeK1
RatingFull bubbleFull bubble
  1. Justification for each type of reliability reported, given the type and purpose of the tool:

The first type of reliability evidence we present is test-retest reliability. Test-retest reliability assesses the consistency in FAST™ earlyReading Composite scores over a 2-3 week period of time.

 

The second type of reliability evidence we present is internal consistency reliability.

 

  1. Description of the sample(s), including size and characteristics, for each reliability analysis conducted:

Approximately 80 students in first grade. Students came from Minnesota.  

 

Internal consistency reliability of the FAST earlyReading Composite was computed based on the 2017-2018 norming sample.

 

  1. Description of the analysis procedures for each reported type of reliability:

Test-retest reliability coefficients were estimated by calculating the median percent agreement between two teachers scores for each student. Confidence intervals represent 95% confidence intervals.

 

Internal consistency reliability coefficients for the FASTTM earlyReading Composite were calculated following Feldt and Brennan (1989), where the reliability coefficient of a composite is a function of the subtest reliabilities, the subtest variances, and the correlations between the subtests. The coefficients below are the median coefficient within a grade level across screening periods. 

 

  1. Reliability of performance level score (e.g., model-based, internal consistency, inter-rater reliability).

Type of Reliability

Age or Grade

n

Coefficient

Confidence Interval

Test-retest

K

80

0.95

0.94, 0.96

Test-retest

1

80

0.97

0.95, 0.98

Internal consistency

K

2,000

0.98

0.97, 0.99

Internal consistency

1

2,000

0.97

0.96, 0.98

 

Disaggregated Reliability

The following disaggregated reliability data are provided for context and did not factor into the Reliability rating.

Type of Reliability

Subgroup

Age or Grade

n

Coefficient

Confidence Interval

None

 

 

 

 

 

 

Validity

GradeK1
RatingHalf-filled bubbleHalf-filled bubble
  1. Description of each criterion measure used and explanation as to why each measure is appropriate, given the type and purpose of the tool:

The criterion measure for both types of validity analyzes (concurrent and predictive) is the GRADE. The GRADE is a diagnostic reading test that that determines what developmental skills PreK-12 students have mastered and where students need instruction or intervention. The GRADE is a paper and pencil test that can take 50-90 minutes to complete. The GRADE comprises two levels with 10 parallel forms per level. Grade-based norms are provided fall and spring.

 

  1. Description of the sample(s), including size and characteristics, for each validity analysis conducted:

Concurrent and predictive analyses with GRADE  were conducted on a sample of students from Minnesota. There were 273 students in grades K-1.

 

  1. Description of the analysis procedures for each reported type of validity:

Validity coefficients were calculated by computing Pearson product moment correlations between FAST™ earlyReading Composite and the criterion measure. Confidence intervals represent 95% confidence intervals.  

 

  1. Validity for the performance level score (e.g., concurrent, predictive, evidence based on response processes, evidence based on internal structure, evidence based on relations to other variables, and/or evidence based on consequences of testing), and the criterion measures.

Type of Validity

Age or Grade

Test or Criterion

n

Coefficient

Confidence Interval

Concurrent

K

GRADE

173

0.67

0.58, 0.75

Concurrent

1

GRADE

100

0.68

0.56, 0.77

Predictive

K

GRADE

173

0.83

0.78, 0.87

Predictive

1

GRADE

100

0.72

0.61, 0.80

 

  1. Results for other forms of validity (e.g. factor analysis) not conducive to the table format:

None provided  

 

  1. Describe the degree to which the provided data support the validity of the tool:

The validity coefficients provide moderate to strong evidence for the use of FAST™ earlyReading as a measure of early literacy skills.

 

 

Disaggregated Validity

The following disaggregated validity data are provided for context and did not factor into the Validity rating.

Type of Validity

Subgroup

Age or Grade

Test or Criterion

n

Coefficient

Confidence Interval

None

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Results for other forms of disaggregated validity (e.g. factor analysis) not conducive to the table format:

None provided  

 

Sample Representativeness

GradeK1
RatingEmpty bubbleEmpty bubble

Primary Classification Accuracy Sample

Representation: National: West North Central.  Large local sample from a single state (Minnesota).

Date: 2012-13

Size: 336

 

Male

47

Female

53

Unknown

Unknown

Other SES Indicators

Unknown

Free or reduced-price lunch

Unknown

White, Non-Hispanic

65

Black, Non-Hispanic

23

Hispanic

6

American Indian/Alaska Native

0

Asian/Pacific Islander

0

Other

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown

Disability classification

11%

First language

Unknown

Language proficiency status

All students were English proficient

 

Bias Analysis Conducted

GradeK1
RatingNoNo
  1. Description of the method used to determine the presence or absence of bias:

None provided

 

  1. Description of the subgroups for which bias analyses were conducted:

None provided

 

  1. Description of the results of the bias analyses conducted, including data and interpretative statements

None provided

 

Administration Format

GradeK1
Data
  • Individual
  • Individual
  • Administration & Scoring Time

    GradeK1
    Data
  • 5-10 minutes
  • 5-10 minutes
  • Scoring Format

    GradeK1
    Data
  • Automatic
  • Automatic
  • Types of Decision Rules

    GradeK1
    Data
  • None
  • None
  • Evidence Available for Multiple Decision Rules

    GradeK1
    Data
  • No
  • No