Concludes that while aspects of the reviewed test may be criticized, overall it is a fine observational tool that provides information about what a child knows about print. (FL)

Finds that the Durrell Analysis of Reading Difficulty is difficult to administer and interpret, takes considerable time to give, and is not comprehensive. (FL)

Reviews the reading sections of the Metropolitan Achievement Tests and offers recommendations for their use. (FL)

Argues that if a testing situation is not similar to situations in which a child regularly performs linguistically, the test's ecological validity is compromised and its results must be viewed skeptically. (FL)

Argues that informal reading inventories fail on several points to provide accurate and reliable scores on the subskills of reading. Asserts that the inventories cannot properly be used to assess children's specific strengths and weaknesses. (FL)

Argues that giving students a reading test that is above or below their levels of achievement will yield inaccurate information. (FL)

Reviews the ANSER System, a set of questionnaires designed to collect background information from parents, teachers, and students that would be useful in conducting indepth evaluations of learning and behavioral problems. Concludes that because it relies on subjective interpretations, its use should be limited to specialists. (FL)

Describes recent Austrian research concerning readability formulas, especially the Swedish Lix formula. Describes a prototype for a system of evaluating the individual variables that contribute to the difficulty of student reading materials. (FL)

Indicates that the format and use of the informal reading inventory need to be modified in order to address recent research findings of schema theory, text analysis, and metacognition. (FL)

Reconceptualizes the diagnosis of reading problems, suggesting that a focus on process, prior experience, and observation during assessment will permit a more valid evaluation of readers' abilities. (FL)