Describes a dozen ways in which reading tests are at variance in their demands with the demands of reading as it occurs in everyday life. Suggests that these sources of variance render reading tests considerably less valid as measures of real world reading behavior than most people want to believe. (RS)

Discusses issues in reading assessment, including the concern that tests can not measure the reading process. Concludes that tests will never be more than useful indicators; calls for more research and examination of existing and new types of reading comprehension tests. (MM)

Suggests techniques for teaching students to comprehend test questions in a manner that requires them to think about both what is in the question and what could be in the passage. (HOD)

Cautions that criterion referenced tests are no more effective at diagnosing comprehension subskills than are traditional instruments, and they may lend false credibility to the subskill approach to comprehension. (AEA)

Finds the revised Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test an improvement over the original edition. (AEA)

Reviews the Spadafore Diagnostic Reading Test, which is used to determine decoding and reading comprehension levels and to give detailed diagnostic information. Concludes that it is not an improvement on similar inventories published previously. (HOD)

Offers comments and suggestions for making reading comprehension test questions dependent on the material read and not on general knowledge. (MS)

Illustrates the importance of carefully interpreting reading test results. (JT)