Iowa Tests of Basic Skills® (ITBS®)
Form C – Reading Comprehension Subtest

Summary

The Iowa Tests of Basic Skills measure the skills, academic growth, and achievement of students from Kindergarten through Grade 8. Developed at The University of Iowa, and backed by a tradition of more than 70 years of educational research and test development experience, the ITBS provides an in-depth assessment of students’ achievement of important educational objectives. Tests in reading, language arts, mathematics, social studies, science, and information sources yield reliable and comprehensive information both about the development of students’ skills and about their ability to think critically. Form C reflects the most up-to-date thinking about curriculum as represented in current content standards, curriculum frameworks, and instructional materials. All test materials have been extensively field tested for psychometric soundness and evaluated for fairness to gender, racial, ethnic, and cultural groups. Test content was chosen for its appeal and interest to children in order to provide test takers with an engaging and motivating testing experience. The ITBS provides educators with accurate and detailed information, allowing them to tailor curricula to the individual educational needs of their students and address any achievement deficiencies early in the school year. By using this diagnostic data to drive instruction, students and educators benefit by higher performance on other assessments such as state tests. While both Complete and Survey batteries are available, we are presenting only the Complete Battery, as it was the battery used when the classification data were computed.

Where to Obtain:
The University of Iowa/The Riverside Publishing Co
3800 Golf Road, Suite 100, Rolling Meadows, IL, 60008
800-323-9540
www.riversidepublishing.com
Initial Cost:
Contact vendor for pricing details.
Replacement Cost:
Contact vendor for pricing details.
Included in Cost:
Test booklets are sold in packages of 25 booklets. Each package includes one Directions for Administration. Students mark their answers using a separate answer document. Answer documents may be centrally scored by the Riverside Scoring Service® or locally scored either by hand or through use of the Riverside Local ScoringPro™ software. A wide range of paper reports are available; we also offer the Interactive Results Manager™ (iRM™), which is a web-based reporting application that can be used to locally analyze assessment data.
Braille and Large-Print editions are available for students with visual impairments. In addition to these special editions, the standardization of the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills also included students using a wide range of accommodations. Such accommodations included the following: extended time, individual/small group administrations, communication assistance, repeated directions, tests read aloud, answers recorded, transferred answers, and tested off level. Those same accommodations can be used when the tests are administered operationally.
Training Requirements:
Less than 1 hour of training
Qualified Administrators:
Professional
Access to Technical Support:
toll-free telephone support & Riverside Field Staff
Assessment Format:
  • Other: Group administered
Scoring Time:
  • Scoring is automatic
Scores Generated:
  • Raw score
  • Standard score
  • Percentile score
  • Grade equivalents
  • Stanines
  • Normal curve equivalents
  • Equated
  • Lexile score
  • Composite scores
  • Subscale/subtest scores
  • Other: predicted scores are available
Administration Time:
  • 55 minutes per student
Scoring Method:
  • Automatically (computer-scored)
Technology Requirements:
Accommodations:
Braille and Large-Print editions are available for students with visual impairments. In addition to these special editions, the standardization of the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills also included students using a wide range of accommodations. Such accommodations included the following: extended time, individual/small group administrations, communication assistance, repeated directions, tests read aloud, answers recorded, transferred answers, and tested off level. Those same accommodations can be used when the tests are administered operationally.

Descriptive Information

Please provide a description of your tool:
The Iowa Tests of Basic Skills measure the skills, academic growth, and achievement of students from Kindergarten through Grade 8. Developed at The University of Iowa, and backed by a tradition of more than 70 years of educational research and test development experience, the ITBS provides an in-depth assessment of students’ achievement of important educational objectives. Tests in reading, language arts, mathematics, social studies, science, and information sources yield reliable and comprehensive information both about the development of students’ skills and about their ability to think critically. Form C reflects the most up-to-date thinking about curriculum as represented in current content standards, curriculum frameworks, and instructional materials. All test materials have been extensively field tested for psychometric soundness and evaluated for fairness to gender, racial, ethnic, and cultural groups. Test content was chosen for its appeal and interest to children in order to provide test takers with an engaging and motivating testing experience. The ITBS provides educators with accurate and detailed information, allowing them to tailor curricula to the individual educational needs of their students and address any achievement deficiencies early in the school year. By using this diagnostic data to drive instruction, students and educators benefit by higher performance on other assessments such as state tests. While both Complete and Survey batteries are available, we are presenting only the Complete Battery, as it was the battery used when the classification data were computed.
The tool is intended for use with the following grade(s).
not selected Preschool / Pre - kindergarten
not selected Kindergarten
not selected First grade
not selected Second grade
selected Third grade
selected Fourth grade
selected Fifth grade
selected Sixth grade
selected Seventh grade
selected Eighth grade
not selected Ninth grade
not selected Tenth grade
not selected Eleventh grade
not selected Twelfth grade

The tool is intended for use with the following age(s).
not selected 0-4 years old
not selected 5 years old
not selected 6 years old
not selected 7 years old
selected 8 years old
selected 9 years old
selected 10 years old
selected 11 years old
selected 12 years old
selected 13 years old
not selected 14 years old
not selected 15 years old
not selected 16 years old
not selected 17 years old
not selected 18 years old

The tool is intended for use with the following student populations.
not selected Students in general education
not selected Students with disabilities
not selected English language learners

ACADEMIC ONLY: What skills does the tool screen?

Reading
Phonological processing:
not selected RAN
not selected Memory
selected Awareness
selected Letter sound correspondence
selected Phonics
selected Structural analysis

Word ID
selected Accuracy
not selected Speed

Nonword
selected Accuracy
not selected Speed

Spelling
selected Accuracy
not selected Speed

Passage
selected Accuracy
not selected Speed

Reading comprehension:
selected Multiple choice questions
not selected Cloze
not selected Constructed Response
not selected Retell
not selected Maze
not selected Sentence verification
not selected Other (please describe):


Listening comprehension:
not selected Multiple choice questions
not selected Cloze
not selected Constructed Response
not selected Retell
not selected Maze
not selected Sentence verification
selected Vocabulary
not selected Expressive
not selected Receptive

Mathematics
Global Indicator of Math Competence
not selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
not selected Multiple Choice
not selected Constructed Response

Early Numeracy
not selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
not selected Multiple Choice
not selected Constructed Response

Mathematics Concepts
not selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
not selected Multiple Choice
not selected Constructed Response

Mathematics Computation
not selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
not selected Multiple Choice
not selected Constructed Response

Mathematic Application
not selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
not selected Multiple Choice
not selected Constructed Response

Fractions/Decimals
not selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
not selected Multiple Choice
not selected Constructed Response

Algebra
not selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
not selected Multiple Choice
not selected Constructed Response

Geometry
not selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
not selected Multiple Choice
not selected Constructed Response

not selected Other (please describe):

Please describe specific domain, skills or subtests:
BEHAVIOR ONLY: Which category of behaviors does your tool target?


BEHAVIOR ONLY: Please identify which broad domain(s)/construct(s) are measured by your tool and define each sub-domain or sub-construct.

Acquisition and Cost Information

Where to obtain:
Email Address
Address
3800 Golf Road, Suite 100, Rolling Meadows, IL, 60008
Phone Number
800-323-9540
Website
www.riversidepublishing.com
Initial cost for implementing program:
Cost
Unit of cost
Replacement cost per unit for subsequent use:
Cost
Unit of cost
Duration of license
Additional cost information:
Describe basic pricing plan and structure of the tool. Provide information on what is included in the published tool, as well as what is not included but required for implementation.
Test booklets are sold in packages of 25 booklets. Each package includes one Directions for Administration. Students mark their answers using a separate answer document. Answer documents may be centrally scored by the Riverside Scoring Service® or locally scored either by hand or through use of the Riverside Local ScoringPro™ software. A wide range of paper reports are available; we also offer the Interactive Results Manager™ (iRM™), which is a web-based reporting application that can be used to locally analyze assessment data.
Provide information about special accommodations for students with disabilities.
Braille and Large-Print editions are available for students with visual impairments. In addition to these special editions, the standardization of the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills also included students using a wide range of accommodations. Such accommodations included the following: extended time, individual/small group administrations, communication assistance, repeated directions, tests read aloud, answers recorded, transferred answers, and tested off level. Those same accommodations can be used when the tests are administered operationally.

Administration

BEHAVIOR ONLY: What type of administrator is your tool designed for?
not selected General education teacher
not selected Special education teacher
not selected Parent
not selected Child
not selected External observer
not selected Other
If other, please specify:

What is the administration setting?
not selected Direct observation
not selected Rating scale
not selected Checklist
not selected Performance measure
not selected Questionnaire
not selected Direct: Computerized
not selected One-to-one
selected Other
If other, please specify:
Group administered

Does the tool require technology?

If yes, what technology is required to implement your tool? (Select all that apply)
not selected Computer or tablet
not selected Internet connection
not selected Other technology (please specify)

If your program requires additional technology not listed above, please describe the required technology and the extent to which it is combined with teacher small-group instruction/intervention:

What is the administration context?
not selected Individual
selected Small group   If small group, n=
selected Large group   If large group, n=
not selected Computer-administered
not selected Other
If other, please specify:

What is the administration time?
Time in minutes
55
per (student/group/other unit)
student

Additional scoring time:
Time in minutes
per (student/group/other unit)

ACADEMIC ONLY: What are the discontinue rules?
selected No discontinue rules provided
not selected Basals
not selected Ceilings
not selected Other
If other, please specify:


Are norms available?
Yes
Are benchmarks available?
No
If yes, how many benchmarks per year?
If yes, for which months are benchmarks available?
BEHAVIOR ONLY: Can students be rated concurrently by one administrator?
If yes, how many students can be rated concurrently?

Training & Scoring

Training

Is training for the administrator required?
Yes
Describe the time required for administrator training, if applicable:
Less than 1 hour of training
Please describe the minimum qualifications an administrator must possess.
Professional
not selected No minimum qualifications
Are training manuals and materials available?
Yes
Are training manuals/materials field-tested?
No
Are training manuals/materials included in cost of tools?
No
If No, please describe training costs:
Can users obtain ongoing professional and technical support?
Yes
If Yes, please describe how users can obtain support:
toll-free telephone support & Riverside Field Staff

Scoring

How are scores calculated?
not selected Manually (by hand)
selected Automatically (computer-scored)
not selected Other
If other, please specify:

Do you provide basis for calculating performance level scores?
Yes
What is the basis for calculating performance level and percentile scores?
not selected Age norms
selected Grade norms
not selected Classwide norms
not selected Schoolwide norms
selected Stanines
selected Normal curve equivalents

What types of performance level scores are available?
selected Raw score
selected Standard score
selected Percentile score
selected Grade equivalents
not selected IRT-based score
not selected Age equivalents
selected Stanines
selected Normal curve equivalents
not selected Developmental benchmarks
not selected Developmental cut points
selected Equated
not selected Probability
selected Lexile score
not selected Error analysis
selected Composite scores
selected Subscale/subtest scores
selected Other
If other, please specify:
predicted scores are available

Does your tool include decision rules?
If yes, please describe.
Can you provide evidence in support of multiple decision rules?
No
If yes, please describe.
Please describe the scoring structure. Provide relevant details such as the scoring format, the number of items overall, the number of items per subscale, what the cluster/composite score comprises, and how raw scores are calculated.
The number of questions a student gets right on a test is the student’s raw score. By itself, a raw score has little or no meaning, and so raw scores are usually converted to other types of scores for interpretational purposes, including standard scores. Composite scores are obtained by averaging the developmental standard scores from certain component tests. The average standard score can be converted to a percentile rank, grade equivalent, or other type of score for interpretational purposes.
Describe the tool’s approach to screening, samples (if applicable), and/or test format, including steps taken to ensure that it is appropriate for use with culturally and linguistically diverse populations and students with disabilities.
Overview of The Iowa Tests The Iowa Tests of Basic Skills are a series of norm-referenced measures that assess student achievement in Kindergarten through Grade 8. The tests are designed to provide a thorough assessment of progress in skills and standards that are essential to successful learning. The overall approach of The ITBS is one of width, not depth, making them an ideal screening tool as part of an RtI program, especially when considering the breadth of skills information obtained within very efficient testing time requirements. Riverside recommends using the tests early in the school year so that students requiring further diagnostic assessment and interventions get needed attention as soon as possible. The ITBS align closely with the recommendations from the National Research Center for Learning Disabilities on Implementing RTI. The Center calls for screening that is school-wide, meets accepted psychometric standards, and has evidence of documented reliability and concurrent and predictive validity within school settings. Because the ITBS can be administered quickly and efficiently to groups of students, they can conveniently be administered to entire school populations. The strong psychometric rigor documented in the accompanying technical information further underscore the ITBS’ appropriateness for use in an RtI program. Test Descriptions Descriptive information on the scope and sequence of the content areas in the ITBS can be found in the Guide to Research and Development. Additional information can be provided upon request. What follows here are some important summary points to note. The Reading Comprehension tests at Grades 3 through 8 measure how well students can comprehend a range of multidisciplinary materials as well as genres, written in different styles for different purposes. Test materials include authentic, high-interest reading passages of varying length and difficulty, many with accompanying artwork to enrich the reading experience. In addition, some information literacy passages explain how to make or do something, or express an opinion or point of view. At each grade, multiple-choice test questions associated with the reading passages measure three levels of comprehension skills: factual or literal understanding, inferential understanding, and analytic/evaluative understanding. The authors of the ITBS regard reading as a complex process requiring readers to interact with text at different levels and multiple ways in constructing meaning. The ability to decode print and to understand a text at a literal level is a core competency of education. Building on basic literacy, there are many other components to the strategic reading skills we as a society expect most students to develop. At all grades, it is useful to know whether difficulty in inferential skills stems from weaknesses in those higher-order skills themselves or, more simply, from weak comprehension at the literal level. The ITBS yields diagnostic information about students’ basic literacy as well as their progress toward constructing more advanced non-literal meanings about central ideas, text organization, and communication style. These components of reading are typically associated with the development of reading and, as such, are particularly appropriate as a screener to determine students’ preparation for new instruction. Test Fairness In addition to statistical analyses undertaken to ensure that the ITBS is appropriate for use with culturally and linguistically diverse student populations, an expert panel reviewed content materials in a research pilot stage of test development. One important role of this independent review by educators with diverse social, cultural, and geographic perspectives was to ensure that items on the tests are readily accessible to all students and that sources of construct-irrelevant variance are minimized. Test Accommodations In collecting normative data during the national standardization of the ITBS, schools were given detailed instructions on the testing of students with disabilities and English Language Learners (ELL) or Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students. Test accommodations included out-of-level testing, extended time, individual/small group administration, repeated directions, provision of English/Native Language word-to-word dictionary, and test administration by ESL teachers or individuals performing language services.

Technical Standards

Classification Accuracy & Cross-Validation Summary

Grade Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Classification Accuracy for Criterion 1 Fall Unconvincing evidence Unconvincing evidence Partially convincing evidence Partially convincing evidence Unconvincing evidence Partially convincing evidence
Classification Accuracy for Criterion 1 Winter Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable
Classification Accuracy for Criterion 1 Spring Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable
Classification Accuracy for Criterion 2 Fall Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable
Classification Accuracy for Criterion 2 Winter Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable
Classification Accuracy for Criterion 2 Spring Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable
Legend
Full BubbleConvincing evidence
Half BubblePartially convincing evidence
Empty BubbleUnconvincing evidence
Null BubbleData unavailable
dDisaggregated data available

Classification Accuracy - Criterion 1 Fall

Evidence Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Criterion measure State Accountability Test State Accountability Test State Accountability Test State Accountability Test State Accountability Test State Accountability Test
Cut Points - Percentile rank on criterion measure
Cut Points - Performance score on criterion measure Below Basic Below Basic Below Basic Below Basic Below Basic Below Basic
Cut Points - Corresponding performance score (numeric) on screener measure 19th percentile 19th percentile 19th percentile 19th percentile 19th percentile 19th percentile
Classification Data - True Positive (a) 1259 918 1448 721 978 929
Classification Data - False Positive (b) 902 359 692 539 333 1330
Classification Data - False Negative (c) 1049 770 936 442 935 355
Classification Data - True Negative (d) 8226 4683 8361 5029 4689 8827
Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0.87 0.90 0.90 0.89 0.90 0.89
AUC Estimate’s 95% Confidence Interval: Lower Bound
AUC Estimate’s 95% Confidence Interval: Upper Bound
Statistics Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Base Rate 0.20 0.25 0.21 0.17 0.28 0.11
Overall Classification Rate 0.83 0.83 0.86 0.85 0.82 0.85
Sensitivity 0.55 0.54 0.61 0.62 0.51 0.72
Specificity 0.90 0.93 0.92 0.90 0.93 0.87
False Positive Rate 0.10 0.07 0.08 0.10 0.07 0.13
False Negative Rate 0.45 0.46 0.39 0.38 0.49 0.28
Positive Predictive Power 0.58 0.72 0.68 0.57 0.75 0.41
Negative Predictive Power 0.89 0.86 0.90 0.92 0.83 0.96
Sample Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Date Fall 2007 through Spring 2008 Fall 2007 through Spring 2008 Fall 2007 through Spring 2008 Fall 2007 through Spring 2008 Fall 2007 through Spring 2008 Fall 2007 through Spring 2008
Sample Size 11436 6730 11437 6731 6935 11441
Geographic Representation            
Male
Female
Other
Gender Unknown
White, Non-Hispanic
Black, Non-Hispanic
Hispanic
American Indian/Alaska Native
Other
Race / Ethnicity Unknown
Low SES
IEP or diagnosed disability
English Language Learner

Reliability

Grade Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Rating Unconvincing evidence Unconvincing evidence Unconvincing evidence Unconvincing evidence Unconvincing evidence Unconvincing evidence
Legend
Full BubbleConvincing evidence
Half BubblePartially convincing evidence
Empty BubbleUnconvincing evidence
Null BubbleData unavailable
dDisaggregated data available
*Offer a justification for each type of reliability reported, given the type and purpose of the tool.
*Describe the sample(s), including size and characteristics, for each reliability analysis conducted.
Reliability estimates were derived from the 2000 and 2005 ITBS national standardization samples of approximately 4,000 to 15,000 nationally representative students, and include both Fall and Spring estimates.
*Describe the analysis procedures for each reported type of reliability.

*In the table(s) below, report the results of the reliability analyses described above (e.g., internal consistency or inter-rater reliability coefficients).

Type of Subgroup Informant Age / Grade Test or Criterion n Median Coefficient 95% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound
95% Confidence Interval
Upper Bound
Results from other forms of reliability analysis not compatible with above table format:
Manual cites other published reliability studies:
Yes
Provide citations for additional published studies.
See Guide to Research and Development and Norms and Score Conversions Booklet
Do you have reliability data that are disaggregated by gender, race/ethnicity, or other subgroups (e.g., English language learners, students with disabilities)?

If yes, fill in data for each subgroup with disaggregated reliability data.

Type of Subgroup Informant Age / Grade Test or Criterion n Median Coefficient 95% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound
95% Confidence Interval
Upper Bound
Results from other forms of reliability analysis not compatible with above table format:
Manual cites other published reliability studies:
Provide citations for additional published studies.

Validity

Grade Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Rating Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable Data unavailable
Legend
Full BubbleConvincing evidence
Half BubblePartially convincing evidence
Empty BubbleUnconvincing evidence
Null BubbleData unavailable
dDisaggregated data available
*Describe each criterion measure used and explain why each measure is appropriate, given the type and purpose of the tool.
Content Validity-Alignment of test with National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) and International Reading Association (IRA) Standards for the English Language Arts. Construct/Content Validity-Fairness review by independent and representative panel, of all Reading Test items identified as functioning differently based on gender or ethnicity (African American/Caucasian, Hispanic/Caucasian). A conditional group difference of .15 or greater on the proportion correct scale was used as the criterion for review. Of the 730 Reading items analyzed, 108 were flagged for review. Items identified by reviewers as problematic were either revised to eliminate objectionable features of eliminated from the final test form.
*Describe the sample(s), including size and characteristics, for each validity analysis conducted.
*Describe the analysis procedures for each reported type of validity.

*In the table below, report the results of the validity analyses described above (e.g., concurrent or predictive validity, 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 Subgroup Informant Age / Grade Test or Criterion n Median Coefficient 95% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound
95% Confidence Interval
Upper Bound
Results from other forms of validity analysis not compatible with above table format:
NOTE: Results from each construct/convergent analysis, by grade level, involved a range of students from two states. Across grades, the minimum range value was 1,000 and the maximum range value was 11,500. Alignment of test with National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) and International Reading Association (IRA) Standards for the English Language Arts. Fairness review by independent and representative panel, of all Reading Test items identified as functioning differently based on gender or ethnicity (African American/Caucasian, Hispanic/Caucasian). A conditional group difference of .15 or greater on the proportion correct scale was used as the criterion for review. Of the 730 Reading items analyzed, 108 were flagged for review. Items identified by reviewers as problematic were either revised to eliminate objectionable features of eliminated from the final test form. Correlation of ITBS Reading scores with Reading scores of two state (one Southeastern; one Midwestern) end-of-grade assessments.
Manual cites other published reliability studies:
Yes
Provide citations for additional published studies.
See Guide to Research and Development and Norms and Score Conversions Booklet
Describe the degree to which the provided data support the validity of the tool.
Do you have validity data that are disaggregated by gender, race/ethnicity, or other subgroups (e.g., English language learners, students with disabilities)?

If yes, fill in data for each subgroup with disaggregated validity data.

Type of Subgroup Informant Age / Grade Test or Criterion n Median Coefficient 95% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound
95% Confidence Interval
Upper Bound
Results from other forms of validity analysis not compatible with above table format:
Manual cites other published reliability studies:
Provide citations for additional published studies.

Bias Analysis

Grade Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Rating No No No No No No
Have you conducted additional analyses related to the extent to which your tool is or is not biased against subgroups (e.g., race/ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, students with disabilities, English language learners)? Examples might include Differential Item Functioning (DIF) or invariance testing in multiple-group confirmatory factor models.
No
If yes,
a. Describe the method used to determine the presence or absence of bias:
b. Describe the subgroups for which bias analyses were conducted:
c. Describe the results of the bias analyses conducted, including data and interpretative statements. Include magnitude of effect (if available) if bias has been identified.

Disclaimer

Most tools and programs evaluated by the NCII are branded products which have been submitted by the companies, organizations, or individuals that disseminate these products. These entities supply the textual information shown above, but not the ratings accompanying the text. NCII administrators and members of our Technical Review Committees have reviewed the content on this page, but NCII cannot guarantee that this information is free from error or reflective of recent changes to the product. Tools and programs have the opportunity to be updated annually or upon request.