The Reading Maturity Survey: Steps Toward Instrument and Construct Validation with College-Level Readers

There is a need to promote growth past basic reading proficiency toward the more substantial idea of reading maturity. The reading maturity construct has a history of being valued, at least in principle. However, it is a complex construct, and this makes its measurement challenging. The present rese...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Reading psychology 2018-10, Vol.39 (7), p.729-761
Hauptverfasser: Thomas, Matt, Yao, Yuankun, Wright, Katherine Landau, Kreiner, David
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 761
container_issue 7
container_start_page 729
container_title Reading psychology
container_volume 39
creator Thomas, Matt
Yao, Yuankun
Wright, Katherine Landau
Kreiner, David
description There is a need to promote growth past basic reading proficiency toward the more substantial idea of reading maturity. The reading maturity construct has a history of being valued, at least in principle. However, it is a complex construct, and this makes its measurement challenging. The present research study addressed aspects of this challenge by using data collected from an instrument called The Reading Maturity Survey, administered twice to 382 college students, to help validate the instrument and to add one piece of validation evidence to the internal structure of the reading maturity construct. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to identify the latent literacy constructs and to examine the relationships between these constructs. The findings contribute to further psychometric validation of The Reading Maturity Survey, and add one new piece of quantitative evidence supporting the theory-based construct of reading maturity. Because this study provides some preliminary evidence of viable ways to both measure and define this construct, our hope is that the findings would move the reading field one step closer to being able to better recognize an overarching unified construct of reading maturity, perhaps eventually (re)establishing it as a goal that literacy education could pursue.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/02702711.2018.1538649
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_infor</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2185658545</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1206764</ericid><sourcerecordid>2185658545</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-5374b2b9e3106f1c64e9d12c564b6c2c181f18088551a85a260ef116ebea5a5d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kFtLAzEQhYMoWC8_QQj4vDWT3aSpT0rxSkWw1deQZmdtZLupSdbSf--2VR-FgWE458yBj5AzYH1gil0wPugGoM8ZqD6IXMliuEd6IDhkTCqxT3obT7YxHZKjGD8YA6HkoEfm0znSFzSla97pk0ltcGlNJ234wvUlnSRcRjr1KxNK-tDEFNoFNomapqQjv71tom-mdqVJzjd05dK8U-oa3zEb4xfW2-cY4gk5qEwd8fRnH5PX25vp6D4bP989jK7Hmc0lS5nIB8WMz4aYA5MVWFngsARuhSxm0nILCipQTCkhwChhuGRYAUicoRFGlPkxOd_9XQb_2WJM-sO3oekqNQclpFCiEJ1L7Fw2-BgDVnoZ3MKEtQamN1D1L1S9gap_oHa5s10Og7N_mZtH4EwOZNHpVzvdNZUPC7PyoS51MuvahyqYxrqo8_8rvgEx6oda</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2185658545</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Reading Maturity Survey: Steps Toward Instrument and Construct Validation with College-Level Readers</title><source>Education Source</source><creator>Thomas, Matt ; Yao, Yuankun ; Wright, Katherine Landau ; Kreiner, David</creator><creatorcontrib>Thomas, Matt ; Yao, Yuankun ; Wright, Katherine Landau ; Kreiner, David</creatorcontrib><description>There is a need to promote growth past basic reading proficiency toward the more substantial idea of reading maturity. The reading maturity construct has a history of being valued, at least in principle. However, it is a complex construct, and this makes its measurement challenging. The present research study addressed aspects of this challenge by using data collected from an instrument called The Reading Maturity Survey, administered twice to 382 college students, to help validate the instrument and to add one piece of validation evidence to the internal structure of the reading maturity construct. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to identify the latent literacy constructs and to examine the relationships between these constructs. The findings contribute to further psychometric validation of The Reading Maturity Survey, and add one new piece of quantitative evidence supporting the theory-based construct of reading maturity. Because this study provides some preliminary evidence of viable ways to both measure and define this construct, our hope is that the findings would move the reading field one step closer to being able to better recognize an overarching unified construct of reading maturity, perhaps eventually (re)establishing it as a goal that literacy education could pursue.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0270-2711</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1521-0685</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/02702711.2018.1538649</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Philadelphia: Routledge</publisher><subject>College Students ; Correlation ; Literacy ; Measurement ; Polls &amp; surveys ; Psychometrics ; Reading ; Reading Attitudes ; Reading Interests ; Reading Materials ; Reading Skills ; Test Validity</subject><ispartof>Reading psychology, 2018-10, Vol.39 (7), p.729-761</ispartof><rights>2019 Taylor &amp; Francis Group, LLC 2019</rights><rights>2019 Taylor &amp; Francis Group, LLC</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-5374b2b9e3106f1c64e9d12c564b6c2c181f18088551a85a260ef116ebea5a5d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-5374b2b9e3106f1c64e9d12c564b6c2c181f18088551a85a260ef116ebea5a5d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1206764$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Thomas, Matt</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yao, Yuankun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wright, Katherine Landau</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kreiner, David</creatorcontrib><title>The Reading Maturity Survey: Steps Toward Instrument and Construct Validation with College-Level Readers</title><title>Reading psychology</title><description>There is a need to promote growth past basic reading proficiency toward the more substantial idea of reading maturity. The reading maturity construct has a history of being valued, at least in principle. However, it is a complex construct, and this makes its measurement challenging. The present research study addressed aspects of this challenge by using data collected from an instrument called The Reading Maturity Survey, administered twice to 382 college students, to help validate the instrument and to add one piece of validation evidence to the internal structure of the reading maturity construct. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to identify the latent literacy constructs and to examine the relationships between these constructs. The findings contribute to further psychometric validation of The Reading Maturity Survey, and add one new piece of quantitative evidence supporting the theory-based construct of reading maturity. Because this study provides some preliminary evidence of viable ways to both measure and define this construct, our hope is that the findings would move the reading field one step closer to being able to better recognize an overarching unified construct of reading maturity, perhaps eventually (re)establishing it as a goal that literacy education could pursue.</description><subject>College Students</subject><subject>Correlation</subject><subject>Literacy</subject><subject>Measurement</subject><subject>Polls &amp; surveys</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Reading</subject><subject>Reading Attitudes</subject><subject>Reading Interests</subject><subject>Reading Materials</subject><subject>Reading Skills</subject><subject>Test Validity</subject><issn>0270-2711</issn><issn>1521-0685</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kFtLAzEQhYMoWC8_QQj4vDWT3aSpT0rxSkWw1deQZmdtZLupSdbSf--2VR-FgWE458yBj5AzYH1gil0wPugGoM8ZqD6IXMliuEd6IDhkTCqxT3obT7YxHZKjGD8YA6HkoEfm0znSFzSla97pk0ltcGlNJ234wvUlnSRcRjr1KxNK-tDEFNoFNomapqQjv71tom-mdqVJzjd05dK8U-oa3zEb4xfW2-cY4gk5qEwd8fRnH5PX25vp6D4bP989jK7Hmc0lS5nIB8WMz4aYA5MVWFngsARuhSxm0nILCipQTCkhwChhuGRYAUicoRFGlPkxOd_9XQb_2WJM-sO3oekqNQclpFCiEJ1L7Fw2-BgDVnoZ3MKEtQamN1D1L1S9gap_oHa5s10Og7N_mZtH4EwOZNHpVzvdNZUPC7PyoS51MuvahyqYxrqo8_8rvgEx6oda</recordid><startdate>20181003</startdate><enddate>20181003</enddate><creator>Thomas, Matt</creator><creator>Yao, Yuankun</creator><creator>Wright, Katherine Landau</creator><creator>Kreiner, David</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Taylor &amp; Francis Ltd</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20181003</creationdate><title>The Reading Maturity Survey: Steps Toward Instrument and Construct Validation with College-Level Readers</title><author>Thomas, Matt ; Yao, Yuankun ; Wright, Katherine Landau ; Kreiner, David</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-5374b2b9e3106f1c64e9d12c564b6c2c181f18088551a85a260ef116ebea5a5d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>College Students</topic><topic>Correlation</topic><topic>Literacy</topic><topic>Measurement</topic><topic>Polls &amp; surveys</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Reading</topic><topic>Reading Attitudes</topic><topic>Reading Interests</topic><topic>Reading Materials</topic><topic>Reading Skills</topic><topic>Test Validity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Thomas, Matt</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yao, Yuankun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wright, Katherine Landau</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kreiner, David</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><jtitle>Reading psychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Thomas, Matt</au><au>Yao, Yuankun</au><au>Wright, Katherine Landau</au><au>Kreiner, David</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1206764</ericid><atitle>The Reading Maturity Survey: Steps Toward Instrument and Construct Validation with College-Level Readers</atitle><jtitle>Reading psychology</jtitle><date>2018-10-03</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>39</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>729</spage><epage>761</epage><pages>729-761</pages><issn>0270-2711</issn><eissn>1521-0685</eissn><abstract>There is a need to promote growth past basic reading proficiency toward the more substantial idea of reading maturity. The reading maturity construct has a history of being valued, at least in principle. However, it is a complex construct, and this makes its measurement challenging. The present research study addressed aspects of this challenge by using data collected from an instrument called The Reading Maturity Survey, administered twice to 382 college students, to help validate the instrument and to add one piece of validation evidence to the internal structure of the reading maturity construct. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to identify the latent literacy constructs and to examine the relationships between these constructs. The findings contribute to further psychometric validation of The Reading Maturity Survey, and add one new piece of quantitative evidence supporting the theory-based construct of reading maturity. Because this study provides some preliminary evidence of viable ways to both measure and define this construct, our hope is that the findings would move the reading field one step closer to being able to better recognize an overarching unified construct of reading maturity, perhaps eventually (re)establishing it as a goal that literacy education could pursue.</abstract><cop>Philadelphia</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/02702711.2018.1538649</doi><tpages>33</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0270-2711
ispartof Reading psychology, 2018-10, Vol.39 (7), p.729-761
issn 0270-2711
1521-0685
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2185658545
source Education Source
subjects College Students
Correlation
Literacy
Measurement
Polls & surveys
Psychometrics
Reading
Reading Attitudes
Reading Interests
Reading Materials
Reading Skills
Test Validity
title The Reading Maturity Survey: Steps Toward Instrument and Construct Validation with College-Level Readers
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T07%3A07%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_infor&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Reading%20Maturity%20Survey:%20Steps%20Toward%20Instrument%20and%20Construct%20Validation%20with%20College-Level%20Readers&rft.jtitle=Reading%20psychology&rft.au=Thomas,%20Matt&rft.date=2018-10-03&rft.volume=39&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=729&rft.epage=761&rft.pages=729-761&rft.issn=0270-2711&rft.eissn=1521-0685&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/02702711.2018.1538649&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_infor%3E2185658545%3C/proquest_infor%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2185658545&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1206764&rfr_iscdi=true