In short
- Measure what pupils do first: how much they read, what they understood and which words they kept.
- Teachers, leaders and parents need different cuts of the same record, not three separate systems.
- Report every gain with its comparison, its period and its number of pupils.
- Try a program with a pilot that can fail, and collect no more data on children than the job needs.
Schools measure reading for three audiences, and it is easy to serve all three badly. The teacher gets forty numbers. The leader gets one headline figure. The parent gets a level that means nothing at home. Meanwhile the simple questions go unanswered. Did this pupil read this week? Did she understand it? Does she still know the words a month later?
This guide follows one argument. Measure what pupils do before what they score. Give each audience its own cut of the same record. Report honestly, with the comparison stated. Try a program before you commit, with a pilot that can fail. Collect no more data on children than the job needs. Each section links to articles that go deeper.
What is reading progress, and what is worth measuring?
Reading progress means that a pupil reads more, understands what they read, keeps the words they met and, over time, manages harder texts. A school needs only five measures to see it: the amount read, comprehension, words retained, level and attendance. The first three record what pupils do each week. Level changes slowly, and attendance helps to explain the rest.
| Measure | What to count | How often it changes |
|---|---|---|
| Amount read | Stories or texts finished by each pupil | Weekly |
| Comprehension | Answers to a short check after each text | Weekly |
| Words retained | Words from earlier texts that a pupil still knows some weeks later | Monthly |
| Level | The CEFR level of the texts a pupil reads with understanding, with steps inside a level | Termly |
| Attendance | Reading sessions or lessons attended | Weekly |
Start with what pupils do. Koretz (2008) describes a test as a sample. It is incomplete, and it is useful only if it represents the larger body of knowledge it stands for. A score describes some of what pupils can do. It does not explain why they can or cannot do it. A weekly record of reading fills part of that gap.
The amount read comes first for a reason. Jeon and Day (2016) combined 49 studies of extensive reading, with 5,919 participants. They found a small to medium effect on reading proficiency. The effect was higher for adults than for children and adolescents, so the evidence for school pupils is thinner. Reading is the input. If pupils are not reading, the other measures have nothing to show.
Three kinds of number are best left alone. Logins count visits, not reading. A school-wide total of minutes hides the pupils who read nothing. A class average does the same on a smaller scale.
The sections below take each audience in turn, then pilots and pupil data. For the levels themselves, see the guide to CEFR reading levels.
What teachers track: this week, this pupil
A teacher's questions are short-range. Who read this week? Who did not? What should tomorrow's lesson do about it?
The research behind this kind of checking is on formative assessment. Black and Wiliam (1998) reviewed about 250 publications. They define formative assessment as all the activities that provide information used as feedback to modify teaching and learning. They found firm evidence that strengthening frequent feedback to pupils yields substantial learning gains.
Their review also reports a meta-analysis of 40 studies of classroom testing, by Bangert-Drowns and colleagues. Performance improved with frequent testing up to a point. Several short tests were more effective than fewer longer ones. Why Short Daily Quizzes Beat Termly Tests applies this to reading. Formative Assessment for Reading in EFL gives classroom routines.
A number on a screen is not feedback until someone acts on it. Hattie and Timperley (2007) reviewed the evidence on feedback. They call it one of the most powerful influences on learning, and they add that its impact can be positive or negative. The type of feedback and the way it is given both matter.
So a teacher's view should be short. Four things are enough:
- Who read and who did not. Names, not percentages.
- Who struggled with the check. A low score on an easy story is a signal about level.
- Which words the class is losing. These are the words to meet again.
- A short list of pupils to speak to. Three names a teacher can act on are worth more than thirty flags.
What Teachers Should See in a Reading Dashboard describes a view built on a class snapshot and a few flags. How to Measure Reading Progress in a Language Program explains how amount, comprehension and level movement fit together. It also covers what to do when they point in different directions.
Classroom example (invented)
Friday, Grade 5. The teacher opens the class record.
Read this week: 23 of 26 pupils. Not started: Omar, Sara and Youssef.
Low on the check: Lina, with 2 of 6 on an A2 story she finished.
Words most often missed: 'although', 'borrow', 'whisper'.
Monday's plan: speak to the three who did not start, offer Lina an easier story, and open the lesson with the three words.
Guides on this
Reporting to leaders and boards: this term, this cohort
A leader's questions are longer-range. Is the program working across a class or a grade? Is it worth the staff time? What should change next term?
Schildkamp (2019) describes data use in schools as a cycle: define goals, collect data, make sense of it, act, and evaluate. She names data literacy and leadership among the most important enablers and barriers. She adds that how to promote the enablers is less well understood. A leader's report is one turn of that cycle.
Choose a few measures and keep them the same each term. KPIs & Metrics for a School Reading Program sorts the candidates into engagement, outcomes and operations.
Why one number is not enough
Campbell (1979) warned that the more a number is used to make decisions, the more pressure there is to corrupt it. The number then distorts the work it was meant to monitor. When test scores become the goal of teaching, he wrote, they 'lose their value as indicators of educational status'. Koretz (2008) reports that high stakes often lead to inflated scores.
The defence is practical. Report several measures that check each other, and never rank staff on one of them.
State the comparison
A gain means little until you say what it is compared with, over how long, and for how many pupils. Kraft (2020) offers a scale for size. He drew on 747 randomised trials of education programs with standardised test outcomes. He proposed that an effect under 0.05 standard deviations is small, 0.05 to under 0.20 is medium, and 0.20 or more is large.
His benchmarks are for studies with a control group. A school's before-and-after figures are not that kind of study. Use his paper to set expectations, not to label your own result. Kraft (2020) also asks readers to weigh an effect against its cost. EdTech ROI for Schools: How to Judge a Reading Program's Value covers the cost side.
Barnett, van der Pols and Dobson (2005) describe a second trap, regression to the mean. Unusually low or high measurements tend to be followed by measurements closer to the mean. So the pupils who scored lowest in September will tend to score higher in December, even with no real change.
| Weak claim | What is missing | Honest version |
|---|---|---|
| Reading scores rose 20 per cent. | The comparison and the number of pupils | The 52 pupils tested in both September and June answered 6 more questions in 40 on the same kind of test. |
| Our weakest readers improved most. | Regression to the mean | The 10 lowest scorers gained more than the class. Part of that is expected even with no real change. |
| The class moved up a level. | How many pupils moved, and who was left out | Of 26 pupils checked twice, 3 reached B1 and 7 moved from A2 to A2+. Two pupils left during the year. |
Levels move slowly
The Council of Europe (2020) says that language proficiency 'is actually a continuum' and calls levels 'a necessary simplification'. It describes plus levels, such as A2+, between the main levels. Most pupils will not change level in one term, so count steps inside a level as well. How to Measure CEFR Progress by Cohort shows how, with a worked example.
All of this fits on one page. How to Write a Term Reading Report for Your Board gives a five-part structure and a template.
Guides on this
Reporting to parents: this child, in plain words
A parent's questions are about one child. Is she improving? What is she reading? What can we do at home?
A level label does not answer them. 'A2+' means little outside the staffroom. The Council of Europe (2020) notes that simple descriptors of what a learner can do are often used to report results to learners and other stakeholders. So turn the level into a sentence about reading.
A report that a parent will read has four parts:
- What the child can read now. One sentence in plain words, with the level in brackets.
- How much she read this term. Stories finished, next to last term's figure.
- What she kept. A few of the words she now knows.
- One next step. Something a family can do in ten minutes.
Example note to a parent (invented)
Maya can now read short stories on familiar topics and answer questions about what happened (level A2).
She finished 9 stories this term. Last term she finished 5.
Words she has kept include 'although', 'borrow' and 'whisper'.
Next step: ask her to tell you one story a week in her own words, in any language.
Hattie and Timperley (2007) found that the type of feedback and the way it is given change its effect. Their review concerns feedback to learners, not reports to parents. Our reading is that the same care applies. A family can act on one clear next step more easily than on a score.
Compare the child with her own earlier record, not with classmates, and leave out her rank in class. This is advice from practice. No study cited in this guide tests parent reports for reading programs.
How to Report Reading Progress to Parents covers structure, how often to write, and how to report on a child who is struggling.
Running a pilot: try before you commit
A pilot is a small trial with a decision at the end. It must be able to fail. If every possible result leads to the same purchase, it was a demonstration.
The Education Endowment Foundation publishes a guide to implementation for schools, by Sharples, Albers, Fraser and Kime (2019). It describes four stages: explore, prepare, deliver and sustain. It suggests that schools should probably make fewer, more strategic choices and pursue them diligently. Among its implementation strategies it lists small-scale pilots. It describes them as small tests of change before system-wide implementation.
The same guide asks schools to define implementation outcomes and to monitor them. Its examples are fidelity, acceptability, reach, feasibility and costs. For a reading pilot, that means three plain questions. Did the sessions run as planned? Did teachers and pupils accept them? How many pupils took part?
A pilot in five steps:
- Write the question. For example: will our Grade 6 pupils read a story a week if we give them the time?
- Set the measures and the pass mark before the first session. A pass mark chosen afterwards proves nothing.
- Choose an ordinary class and an ordinary teacher.
- Run for a fixed period. A few weeks will show habits. They will rarely show a change of level.
- Decide. Adopt, adapt or stop, and write down why.
Step 3 matters more than it seems. Kraft (2020) notes that programs are unlikely to keep their effect at scale if they depend on the charisma of one person. The same holds if they depend on a small group of highly trained staff. A pilot run by your keenest teacher tests the teacher.
Keep expectations modest. Jeon and Day (2016) found a small to medium effect for extensive reading. The median effect in the trials that Kraft (2020) collected was 0.10 standard deviations. Judge a short pilot on what can move in a short time: participation, amount read, comprehension and staff time.
How to Run a Pilot of a Reading Platform sets out the steps in full.
Student data: collect only what the job needs
Every measure in this guide is a record about a child. The rule is short. Collect what you will use, show it only to the people who need it, and remove it when the job is done.
This section is practice, not research. No study cited here tests one data policy against another. Privacy law also differs from country to country, so check the rules that apply to your school.
Schildkamp (2019) lists many kinds of data a school could use: formal data, informal data, research evidence and 'big data'. That a kind of data exists is not a reason to collect it. Start from the decision you need to make. Then work back to the fewest records that support it.
| Audience | What they need | What they do not need |
|---|---|---|
| Teacher | Named records for pupils in their own classes | Records of pupils they do not teach |
| School leader | Totals by class, grade and term | Named records, except when acting on one case |
| Parent | Their own child's record | Any other child's record, or their child's rank |
| The public | Totals for the school, if the school chooses to publish them | Any named pupil |
Five questions to put to any vendor:
- What do you record about each pupil, and why?
- Who can see a named pupil's record, inside and outside our school?
- Where is the data kept, and for how long?
- Can we export it, and delete it when we leave?
- Is it used for anything other than teaching our pupils?
Student Data Privacy: Questions to Ask an EdTech Vendor turns these into a fuller list for a sales call.
Putting it together in a school week
One record serves every audience. The school keeps it once and cuts it four ways. The table is an example, not a prescription.
| Who | When | What they look at | What they decide |
|---|---|---|---|
| Teacher | Every week | Who read, who struggled, which words are slipping | Who to speak to, and what to revisit |
| Coordinator | Every month | Amount read and attendance, class by class | Which class needs help |
| School leader | Every term | The five measures for each cohort, with comparisons | Keep, change or stop |
| Parent | Every term | One child's reading, in plain words | One thing to do at home |
In a week with three English lessons, the measuring itself should take minutes. Pupils read and answer a short check. The record fills as they go. The teacher looks once, on a fixed day, and acts on Monday.
What to check each term
- Are the definitions the same as last term? If a definition changed, say so next to the number.
- Who was left out of each number? Pupils who joined, left or missed a check.
- Did any number become a target? Read it with more care if it did.
- Is there a record that nobody used? Stop collecting it.
How iRead supports this
In iRead, every game clear and quiz answer feeds one progress record per word. Teachers see retention per word, per game and per class. School leaders see levels reached, words retained and stories completed, by class, grade and term. Individual student data is visible only to the school's own staff, and a school's public page shows aggregate numbers only. A school can run a free pilot with one class for 4 to 6 weeks before any school-wide decision.
Frequently asked questions
How do you measure reading progress?
Track five things: the amount read, comprehension, words retained, level and attendance. The first three record what pupils do each week. Level changes slowly, so check it at the start of the year and the end of each term, the same way each time.
What is reading progress monitoring?
It is the regular checking of pupils' reading so that teaching can change in response. Black and Wiliam (1998) found firm evidence that strengthening frequent feedback to pupils yields substantial learning gains. In practice it means a short weekly look at who read and who struggled.
How often should reading progress be checked?
Weekly for the amount read and comprehension, monthly for words retained, and termly for level. Black and Wiliam (1998) report a meta-analysis of 40 studies of classroom testing. In it, several short tests were more effective than fewer longer ones.
What should a reading progress report for parents say?
Four things in plain words: what the child can read now, how much she read this term, some words she has kept, and one next step for home. Compare the child with her own earlier record, not with classmates.
How big a gain should a school expect from a reading program?
A modest one. Jeon and Day (2016) found a small to medium effect of extensive reading across 49 studies, and a lower effect for children and adolescents than for adults. Kraft (2020) found a median effect of 0.10 standard deviations in trials of education programs.
What should a pilot of a reading program measure?
Measure what can move in a few weeks: participation, amount read, comprehension and staff time. Set the measures and the pass mark before the first session. A short pilot will rarely show a change of level, so do not make level the test.
Sources
- Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74. doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
- Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
- Koretz, D. (2008). Measuring Up: What Educational Testing Really Tells Us. Harvard University Press. www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674035218
- Campbell, D. T. (1979). Assessing the impact of planned social change. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2(1), 67-90. doi.org/10.1016/0149-7189(79)90048-X
- Kraft, M. A. (2020). Interpreting effect sizes of education interventions. Educational Researcher, 49(4), 241-253. doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20912798
- Schildkamp, K. (2019). Data-based decision-making for school improvement: Research insights and gaps. Educational Research, 61(3), 257-273. doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2019.1625716
- Barnett, A. G., van der Pols, J. C., & Dobson, A. J. (2005). Regression to the mean: what it is and how to deal with it. International Journal of Epidemiology, 34(1), 215-220. doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyh299
- Council of Europe (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Companion volume. Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg. rm.coe.int/common-european-framework-of-reference-for-languages-learning-teaching/16809ea0d4
- Sharples, J., Albers, B., Fraser, S., & Kime, S. (2019). Putting Evidence to Work: A School's Guide to Implementation. Guidance Report (2nd ed.). Education Endowment Foundation, London. d2tic4wvo1iusb.cloudfront.net/eef-guidance-reports/implementation/EEF_Implementation_Guidance_Report_2019.pdf
- Jeon, E.-Y., & Day, R. R. (2016). The effectiveness of ER on reading proficiency: A meta-analysis. Reading in a Foreign Language, 28(2), 246-265. doi.org/10.64152/10125/66901