Reviews the Nelson-Denny Reading Test (Forms E and F) and finds it an easy to use and valid norm-referenced survey test for determining the level of student reading achievement, assessing individual differences, and deriving group means. (AEA)

Provides an approach for selecting and evaluating both group and individually administered standardized tests of reading. Reviews considerations of the quality of test development; test content; test reliability and validity; and concerns of cost and time investment. Presents sample ratings of two common instruments. (RS)

Reviews the Sucher-Allred Group Reading Placement, used to determine the instructional reading level for students in grades 2-12. Concludes that the test correlates well with other standard tests and is useful as an informal reading inventory. (RS)

Indicates that the Rix modification of the Lix Readability Formula is easy to calculate, correlates highly with other popular formulas, and is useful for materials for grades 3 through 12. (AEA)

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)

Concludes that The London Procedure does not reflect contemporary research in the fields of literacy acquisition and learning disabilities. (AEA)

Describes the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests and evaluates their suitability for testing reading, concluding that they appear to be carefully developed survey tests of general reading achievement. (DD)

Reports an overall positive response to the tests reviewed, with caveats regarding test reliability and validity. (AEA)

Reviews the "Quick-Score Achievement Test" (Q-SAT), an individually administered measure of school achievement for use with students aged 7-18, which has two forms and yields scores for reading, writing, arithmetic, facts, and general achievement. (SKC)

Concludes that the test has basic problems in construction, interpretation, validity, and reliability. (FL)

Criticizes the Detroit Tests of Learning Aptitude 2 (DLTA-2): (1) scoring criteria for the Story Construction Test are questionable; (2) the Word Fragment Test may not be practically significant; (3) the Picture Book is inconvenient to use without an index or table of contents. One major strength is the provision for combining subtest scores. (SRT)

Describes the Luiten, Ames, Bradley Readability Variation Method for estimating the variation within a text. Concludes that it is practical and relatively accurate. (HOD)

Discusses the uses and limitations of a test designed to identify that reading disabled subgroup whose principal deficit is in the ability to deal with visual stimuli holistically. (AEA)

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

Comments on the strengths and weaknesses of the reading portions of the California Achievement Tests. (JT)