Interpreting the ROAR Scores
ROAR-Word Recognition (ROAR-WR) is the primary measure within the ROAR suite. Word recognition is at the foundation of reading and is a prerequisite for reading fluency and comprehension.
- The ROAR Raw Score is the number of real/made-up words that the participant accurately identified. There are 252 items in total (84 per test form) and random guessing will result in roughly 50% correct. ROAR Raw Scores range from 126 (chance) to 252 (perfect). High scores mean that the participant is able to rapidly recognize difficult and complex words.
- ROAR Standard Scores are created by converting the raw scores to a Woodcock-Johnson Basic Reading Skills Index equivalent score, since this is a widely used assessment. These estimated standard scores are normalized by age, meaning that each participant’s score is comparable to others of the same age. Standard scores have a population mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 based on a normative national sample.
- ROAR Percentile Scores give each participants percentile rank relative to a normative national sample. Thus percentile scores can be used to interpret where a student’s word recognition skills are relative to others of their age.
- ROAR Risk Scores classify each participant into one of three categories: At Risk, Some Risk, or Doing Well. These categories are created by applying cut scores to the percentile rank scores. More specifically, participants performing below the 25th percentile are flagged as At Risk. Students performing between the 25th and 50th percentile are flagged as being at Some Risk. Finally, participants performing above the 50th percentile are classified as Doing Well. The participants within the first two categories performed below average, according to their percentile scores, and may benefit from additional reading support and intervention.
We are currently researching how to best refine the thresholds for identifying students who may benefit from additional support. It is important to interpret these classifications in the context of existing knowledge of each participant’s reading ability.