Subject: English Language Arts
Grade Level(s): K – 6
Measures Growth: Yes
Visit Website
The Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) are a set of procedures and measures for assessing the acquisition of early literacy skills from kindergarten through sixth grade. They are designed to be short (one minute) fluency measures used to regularly monitor the development of early literacy and early reading skills. DIBELS assesses literacy skills using six different measures: retell fluency; oral reading fluency; nonsense word fluency; phoneme segmentation fluency; word use fluency; letter naming fluency; and initial sound fluency. The measures are designed to be administered either individually or in suite as needed, and across different grade levels.
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level • Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year
Cons: It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
DIBELS assessments are good for phonemic awareness. It helps target instruction with basic phonics (CVC words). But it is useless in determining other phonic gaps. There should be a gradual increase in the difficulty of fluency passages to determine exactly where students are and where they need to go. Going from the NWF test to the grade 1 DORF is a huge jump. Many of the topics of the passages are odd (skimboarding?). The retelling aspect of the test is too subjective and a waste of time.
Submitted by Lisa in California on May 17, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Data is presented clearly
Cons: Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time
I struggle with the DIBELS assessment and it's results because as a special education teacher, I don't feel that timed tests demonstrate what my students truly know. Also, the brief amount of time given to each portion of the DIBELS assessment doesn't allow for my students to show much growth over the course of a school year.
Submitted by Patricia in Illinois on May 7, 2013
Pros: Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
Cons: Difficult to administer
The amount of time it takes to administer dibles is managable. The difficulty, however, is trying to keep the other students busy while you are giving to test to just one students. Multiply a one minute test by sometimes five tests at K-1 level and 25 + students and this becomes a waste of instructional time. This is especially a struggle at the beginning of the year before routines are established. I can determine how well my students are doing using informal assessments.
Submitted by D. in Ohio on May 2, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
Dibels has proved to be a helpful tool in my special education teaching practice, especially for the lower grades. I can pinpoint exactly what the student is struggling with and address the issue quickly.
Submitted by Thais in Colorado on April 25, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
Cons: Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
I have used this assessment with my k-5 students and love the speediness of the assessment as well as the data I get from it. To know that a first grader isn't able to meet the kindergarten phonemic goals helps me guide my intervention for that student. There is no subjectivity to the assessment either.
Submitted by Sabrina in Colorado on April 25, 2013
Pros: Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
Cons: Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
In my opinion, this test is useful for assessing fluency only. It does not accurately reflect the student's skills in comprehending text.
Submitted by Gail in Washington on April 24, 2013
Pros: Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly
Cons: Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time • It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
This assessment provides a snapshot of the student's present level but does not identify the specific areas of weakness to direct instruction.
Submitted by Debra in California on April 18, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
DIBELS Next is used to assess K-6 students in early literacy skills. The students are assessed 3 times a year. The students that do not meet the benchmark goals must have their progress monitored. The progress monitoring assessments can be very time consuming because so many students do not meet the benchmark goals.
Submitted by Jennifer in Pennsylvania on April 18, 2013
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking
Cons: Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time
Our students have been taught to speed read through the course of using DIBELS in their early educational assessment. While reading quickly and accurately should help with comprehension, the students are not realizing that UNDERSTANDING what they read is MORE important than reading quickly.
Submitted by Laura in Massachusetts on April 18, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach
Cons: Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
Cons: Difficult to administer
Difficult to administer, in the sense that, depending on what teacher administers the test you may receive different results. A teacher that understands a student's needs will be more effective in achieving an appropriate result. A teacher that does not understand a student's needs will be less effective.
Submitted by Alyce in Massachusetts on April 18, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
Dibels shows me the impact of my instruction in fluency. It is quick, gives me info. immediately, and lets me make the changes in instruction that may be needed for some students.
Submitted by Maureen in Massachusetts on April 18, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly
Cons: It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
As a K teacher, all groupings for ELA are based on DIBELS 1-minute timed tests per order of my district. This test doesn't take comprehension abilities, environmental factors, learning differences, or even sneezing into consideration. It should be used in conjunction with other assessments.
Submitted by Elizabeth in Massachusetts on April 18, 2013
Pros: Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly
Cons: Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
The reading passages are not in a readable form for average first graders. The font is too small.
Submitted by Rosemarie in Maine on April 17, 2013
Pros: Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year
Cons: It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
This instrument provides a narrow assessment of students' skills in a very narrow, focused area of reading. It is quick and easy to administer, but its brevity also presents some problems for assessing young children, who may need some "warm up" time before being tested. If it were used only as a single indicator, I would have less of a problem with it, but since its results are included in teacher evaluations, I see colleagues drilling little kids on "nonsense words," so that they will perform better on this test. I have also read concerns from leaders in the field of early literacy (i.e. Goodman, Pearson) about this test. As a reading specialist, I find its application and use appalling, and as a classroom teacher, I refuse to let it guide my instruction.
Submitted by Kathleen in Michigan on April 15, 2013
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level • Takes students too long to complete
Cons: Difficult to administer • Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time • It is hard to use the data
As a first grade teacher, this assessment is NOT grade level appropriate. The reading passages are at a 3rd and 4th grade level. The written passage that first grade students use to read from is also not appropriate. The font size is too small for the students to see. Also some letters are letters used not in any of the anthologies or story books they read. Therefore the students are confused as to what letter it is and their reading fluency slows down.
Submitted by T in California on April 14, 2013
Pros: Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly
Cons: Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time • It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
Does not assess what the titles of the individual components (above kindergarten level) would lead you to believe. The fluency portion is simply SPEED and nothing else, which misses the most important half of fluency. The comprehension portion being assessed via a cloze procedure is a joke. Too many other variables....vocabulary, word reading, on and on. Sure it only takes one minute to administer, but this is a case of you reap what you sow. A test this quick gives you basically NO real info about a child's reading. Though teachers and administrators often require it
because it IS quick and can meet the letter of the law, so to speak, to show growth or monitor progress. Seems to be mandated often by district-level administrators who know absolutely nothing about the teaching of literacy and reading. Data people love this one, not really getting that it's pretty much empty data.
Submitted by cynthia in Vermont on April 14, 2013
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Cons: Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
No Stars to the University of Oregon and the administrators who view simple-minded approaches to assessing complex reading behaviors as a valid use resorces. My favorite "minute" of the "six" minute suite of assessments is the nonsense word fluency section. Children are taught that reading is meaningful. Then we have them read made-up CVC patterned words. The advertised six minute assessment, takes about twelve minutes per child. 30 students times 12 minutes times 4 times a year is a loss of a lot of instructional time. The intensive weekly assessments for the bottom quartile takes away even more instructional time. You can plot trend lines but of dubious usefulness. Keeping running records, using a reading benchmark checklist asking a child how they feel about reading are all better indicators than DIBELS.
Submitted by Thea in Oregon on April 14, 2013
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level • Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Results returned quickly
Cons: Difficult to administer • Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time • It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
The letter sound test does not tell me which letter sounds the students are missing or need to learn. Also, for English Language Learners, they need more time to say the letter sounds/or names. This test basically test to see how quickly students can say the letter names or sounds. Also, with 40 kindergarten students in a classroom, that means it takes over 40 minutes to give the test to the whole classroom. Teaching time is lost, because I cannot teach or monitor the other students while I am suppose to be giving the test. Also, some students do not respond well if other people give them the test, especially early in the school year. I have had several students refuse to speak to the test administrator, so their score does not reflect what they know, only that they would not speak.
Submitted by meggan in Nevada on April 13, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking • Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
Cons: Difficult to administer • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
It takes way to long to give to first graders at the beginning of the year.
Submitted by Jennifer in California on April 13, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level • Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
Cons: Difficult to administer • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
This assessment is just not a good use of my students' time! The passages used to measure fluency are not interesting or well-written, making them less meaningful than running records using authentic, (and often free) complex texts. In addition, measures such as Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF) are INSULTING to children who should be decoding real words! I understand that knowledge of phonics should allow them to read nonsense words, BUT WHY WOULD WE DO THAT TO THEM? Some of the words are even correctly pronounced as real words, so children change the vowel sound to force a nonsense word and get penalized! In addition, expression is not considered a target skill, so students who give a meaningful reading that demonstrates comprehension could still be assessed as "strategic" rather than "benchmark." This test narrow, inauthentic, and generally outdated!
Submitted by Susan in Illinois on April 13, 2013
Pros: Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Data is presented clearly
Cons: Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
This test only addresses fluency and word attack. Does not evaluate comprehension or any other higher level thinking.
Submitted by Margaret in Delaware on April 13, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year
Cons: It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
This only tests a very small portion of what I teach. It is best used for fluency which I can test in conjunction with assessments that also tell me about accuracy, reading cues and comprehension, which this one does not cover.
Submitted by Jennifer in Oregon on April 12, 2013
Pros: Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Data is presented clearly
Cons: Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
The DIBELS assesses phonics ability and not much else. I teach kindergarten to second language learners. The beginning of the year assessment does not provide me much information that is useful. The letter naming test only tells me who has had a robust preschool education - information I already have - it doesn't tell me who knows what letters, or even how many of them. Moving on to the middle of the year test - the segmenting and blending portions aren't bad, but I believe the nonsense word fluency is potentially harmful to second language learners. They have a hard enough time figuring out what is a proper English word and what isn't. We can tell them they are silly words, but they know from the time, energy and affect we give the test that they are important words to us. It is too easy for second language learners to get a grasp of the sound spelling system and learn to parrot ... testing for parroting, and thereby giving it importance is clearly counter productive.
Submitted by Cynthia in California on April 11, 2013
Pros: Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
Cons: Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
The DIBELS gives quick information but the information is not very specific. It helps determine who is fluent, but I know that already. My school didtrict does this three times a year in 3rd grade, but I rarely find the data useful to my teaching.
Submitted by Michael-Ann in Utah on April 11, 2013
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
Cons: Difficult to administer • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
DIBELS is a ridiculous test for K when there is no support for the teacher. First we did not get computers to input the data. Paper and pencil was a horrible substitute for technology that would input data instantly. No money for computers, then we should not have the test; or have someone else administer the test. Don't make more unpaid work for the teacher, by having them bubble in answers on their own time! Then we got the computers. Cool. NOT! Who is supervising 24 five year olds while one student is occupied with the teacher assessing one child for over 10 minutes per assessment, all with NO interruptions?! Who thought that this was an effective model for classroom assessment? How is a teacher supposed to "train" a beginning K class to be silent during an assessment. What are they supposed to do while I assess? Color? Watch a video? It is the most short sighted answer to data driven instruction I've ever experienced. Over time the students learn how to cope with assessments, but why? Is the data really that unique? Is the data really that instrumental in forming directed instruction? I've been teaching 26+ years and I'd like to think we have better ways to assess understanding and proficiency. How about viewing work samples? How about using Textbook based culminating Unit assessments? How about using the District Quarterly assessments? Gasp, how about teacher created assessments? Oh yes, right, that is not standardized and does not measure my proficiency! What is the goal of testing now? Teacher accountability or student accountability? How is this data being used? By the teacher or by the district to track the teacher's effectiveness? The over testing of K needs to be addressed. It's spinning out of control. Where are the developmentally appropriate assessments that encourage higher level thinking? This is not even tied to any CA standards! Or CCC that I can determine. Clearly this is not my favorite method of assessment.
Submitted by Christine in California on April 11, 2013
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level • Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
Cons: Difficult to administer
The test is being currently used as an important tool in assessing students that need extra support. However, as long as it takes most teachers a LOOOONG time to complete the assessments and progress monitoring testing, I don't think it is of any real value. As long as assessments are not given appropriate technological support to conduct them, they really don't seem to be of any benefit. Also, for what it is testing, all the work involved is not creating enough "bang for its buck".
Submitted by becca in California on April 10, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
Benchmarks are not rigorous enough for Common Core.
Submitted by Sue in Montana on April 10, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year
Cons: Difficult to administer
When I used the DIBELS as an MTSS progress monitoring tool, we had some technical issues with the data website, so I didn't get to see how it works. I really liked using the quadrants to screen for reading difficulties. However, it only measures speed and accuracy, not thinking skills. It also takes a long time to assess a whole class, since each student is assessed individually.
Submitted by Sharon in Kansas on April 10, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
D.I.B.E.L.S. is a very valuable tool in ability grouping my first graders.
Submitted by Melissa in Ohio on April 10, 2013
Pros: Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer
DIBELS needs to adjust how they score or rank students. I have had several students scored on grade level solely because their rate and fluency are high. Rate and fluency are obviously important, but if those students can't remember a THING they have just read, they should NOT be considered on level. At the other end, I have had students who may be a little slower than the expected rate, but can tell practically every detail of the passage. They are still marked below level. I would MUCH rather have a student who comprehends, than one who speeds! After all, isn't understanding what we read, the reason we DO read?
Submitted by Katherine in Utah on April 10, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
DIBELS is a good tool to monitor student's fluency in reading. It however, does not address comprehension. It would be nice to have a few questions for the students to answer orally after they read the 1 min. passage.
Submitted by Norma in Oregon on April 10, 2013
Pros: Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Results returned quickly
Cons: Difficult to administer • Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time • It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
There is a better assessment out there. This one doesn't really give data that reflects what my 1st graders actually know.
Submitted by Marylyn in Kansas on April 9, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level • Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly
Cons: Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time • It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
DIBELS is sold as such a quick and easy way to monitor student progress, yet I find it to be an enormous waste of time. Approximately 10-12 minutes per student administered a minimum of 3 times per year to yield little to know data valuable to my instruction adds up to a lot of wasted instructional time. Perhaps if I were given leeway to use it on students I needed to track and not all students, I would be able to see some value. As is it, under strict guidelines from my district, I must test all of my students 3 times a year and continue to test those who are below the benchmark every 2-4 weeks. I find the scores are useless in forming my instruction, as many of my students know the skills but do not speak fast enough to earn the established scores. It seems the tests assess rate of speaking more so than they do literacy skills. Moreover, the scores don't consistently identify who is actualy in need of intervention; yet, my district requires that I provide and document intervention for all students below benchmark. I have had students who read well above grade-level on text reading assessments who score as in need of intensive intervention, as well as students who read well below grade-level who show up as not needing intervention at all. It is also completely silly to test below level readers' fluency using a passage that is well beyond their reach. These students' scores fluctuate only according to how many easy sight words happen to occur within the first sentence or two. I fear the day that teachers pay is linked to DIBELS test scores and some are tempted to succumb to teaching students to perform these tests at faster and faster speeds. DIBELS measures important skills but not in valid ways. A good teacher doesn't need a timed to test to gain this information. I will always prefer a comprehensive reading assessment such the DRA or the Benchmarks assessments (Fountas and Pinnell).
Submitted by Melissa in Ohio on April 9, 2013
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking • Takes students too long to complete
DIBELS places too much emphasis on speed and not enough on just growth.
Submitted by Janice in Alabama on April 9, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
DIBELS is an excellent inventory of basic literacy skills in kindergarten children. The only problem with the administration of this test is that it must be given individually. I teach a class of at least 23 children and I have no teaching assistant or anyone else to assist students while I test each child one at a time. For this reason, it is time consuming for the teacher but not for the students. It just takes me away from teaching them. However, the data that is collected from this assessment is valuable at various points throughout the year. It gives specific information about students' skills. The data can also be presented in the form of graphs and charts which is very helpful for parents, special needs teachers, and other stakeholders in the educational setting.
Submitted by Dianne in Indiana on April 9, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level • Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Results returned quickly • Data is presented clearly
Cons: Difficult to administer • Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
Although this test looks at fluency it is not a good test for a Kindergartener. Many times the instructions for taking the test go over the students head and they just sit there with blank look on their face. The time constraints are near impossible to administer in a Kindergarten classroom as well, we must take each student separately and find someone to take our class so the student can hear the instruction. The instructions are hard for English Language Learners to understand as well!
Submitted by Jennifer in Washington on April 9, 2013
Pros: Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level • Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly
Cons: Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time • It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
DIBELS is supposed to assess fluency as an indicator of students' reading skills. If you can read quickly, you do well on this assessment. But, as good teachers know, many students can quickly decode, but not comprehend what they are reading. Read Kenneth S. Goodmnan's, "The Truth About DIBELS." It contains peer reviewed research on the ineffectiveness of DIBELS as an assessment of anything. The teachers at our school quickly discontinued its use when they realized the fallacy of the DIBELS' promoters claims.
Submitted by Stephanie in Virginia on February 18, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
Cons: It is hard to use the data
Great tool to measure those indicators of early literacy. After attending the training and reviewing manuals, its very easy to administer. You can just get better at administering. Love having the data graphed and listed as soon as the student is finished. Very helpful progress monitoring. It is time consuming to administer, but it is worth the time.
Submitted by Veronica in California on April 19, 2012
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
As a SpEd teacher, DIBELS information has been helpful in determining which specific literacy "building blocks" students are struggling with. I have used probes from below or above a student's grade level to hone in on growth for those students. Standardized instructions for administering the different probes and clear norms for where students should be scoring at certain grade levels are helpful for tracking student progress. Designed to be administered at three different benchmarks/year and also includes progress monitoring. A huge pro is that the materials are available openly and free of charge online, though the probes really need to be administered and scored according to the standardized instructions, which are different for each probe. Some probes have confusing scoring rules. At my school we use the mClass software to electronically record and track the data and this is extremely helpful for both administering and analyzing results. Like others have said, this has to be administered 1:1 and it's sometimes hard to plan for this in terms of classroom management if you are giving it to a whole class. Doesn't assess comprehension, students sometimes get the idea from the oral reading fluency probe that it's important to read "as fast as you can" instead of reading for meaning and then they also make careless decoding errors. For my purposes, given to small groups of students who are receiving intensive literacy instruction, it has been helpful.
Submitted by Claire in District of Columbia on March 22, 2012
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
DIBELS is not designed to serve as a diagnostic tool such as the DRA. It is a screener designed to help teachers understand some possible reasons for student deficits. I would not waste time administering the DIBELS to a student that is on target. I would however, administer it to a student that is having some difficulties in reading so that you will have some directions for your next steps. There is a high emphasis on speed only to determine how well a child is processing. A child that processes slow may have difficulties later in comprehension because the reading will not be automatic. Teachers and administrators should not get caught up in making this a diagnostic tool. It is a quick assessment to head you in the right direction for determining next steps for the child.
Submitted by Renee in Arkansas on March 14, 2012
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level • Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
Cons: Difficult to administer • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
On the surface Dibels looks like a great phonics assessment, but I have some misgivings. The fact that it tests nonsense words means it is not completely applicable to every day learning, especially in higher grades (we give it through second grade, I think it should stop at K). I also find that this type of testing yields very fluctuating results, a students mishears a letter sound from the administrator and gets a lower score, and with how many sounds and words they are hearing, it is easy for them to mix a "d" with a "b" or a "th" with a "t". Also the test is given one on one, which brings up another issue if the test administrator has an accent or doesn't inflect their words in a correct phonemic way, and takes a while to administer. I use other phonics assessments as my main drivers for phonics instruction (Words Their Way, phoneme, and high frequency words assessments). I am speaking from a 1st grade perspective, and I do believe that some teachers may believe it has a more positive place in lower grades (PK-K).
Submitted by Marcello in District of Columbia on February 29, 2012
Pros: Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
Cons: Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
This assessment focuses on how quickly and accurately students recognize and decode words. It's helpful to see how your students compare with national norms, but because the focus of the assessment is so narrow and limited, its utility in the classroom is too.
Submitted by Wendy in Massachusetts on February 19, 2012
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly
Cons: It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
DIBELS is a quick snapshot of whether students can do certain literacy skills or not. It does not show the growth of students far below or far above grade level. It does not have data that I can use as a teacher to move students to the next level. There is no higher order thinking or comprehension skills.
Submitted by Tracie in Illinois on January 21, 2012
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year
Pros:
We use the DIBELS using mClass software for K-3. This is very helpful since the assessment data is automatically recorded into the program. It takes about 10 minutes to assess each student using an iPad. The DIBELS data is helpful since it compares student results on a national level. Since it is given three times during the year, it is easy to track student progress in letter recognition, letter/sound correspondence, and fluency.
Cons: The comprehension results are based on a retell only.
Submitted by Karina in California on January 21, 2012
Copyright © 2012–2013 Assessment Advisor. All Rights Reserved.