Spreadsheet: b90a527e-b58b-4c5e-8b4f-96c75d7674bd
Sheet: DIBELS

Instrument Name: | Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS)® Next Benchmark Goals and Composite Score
Vendor: | Dynamic Measurement Group
Purpose: | Six measures that are to be used as indicators of the essential skills that every child must master to become a proficient reader. The measures should be used to indicate which students are experiencing difficulty acquiring basic early literacy skills so that support can be provided early to prevent later reading difficulties. The measures help teachers identify areas to target with instructional support and can be used to monitor the students while they receive targeted supported. The measures can also be used at the classroom, school, and district level to examine the effectiveness of the system of support.
Content Area and Student Population: | Early literacy skills related to reading: DIBELS Composite Score, First Sound Fluency (FSF), Letter Naming Fluency (LNF), Phoneme Segmenation Fluency (PSF), [NAME] (NWF), DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency (DORF), Daze; [NAME].
Frequency: | The authors have recommended administration windows for benchmarking either 3 or 4 times per year, and progress monitoring recommendations vary based on the level of instructional support the child needs. A child with more intensive needs should be monitored as often as weekly, while other students may only need to be progress monitored every other week. Separate progress monitoring probes are provided for this purpose.
More Information: | DIBELS benchmark goals are empirically derived, criterion-referenced target scores that represent adequate reading progress. A benchmark goal indicates a level of skill where the student is likely to achieve the next DIBELS benchmark goal or reading outcome. Benchmark goals for DIBELS are based on research that examines the predictive validity of a score on a measure at a particular point in time, compared to later DIBELS measures and external outcome assessments. If a student achieves a benchmark goal, then the odds are in favor of that student achieving later reading outcomes if he/she receives research-based instruction from a core classroom curriculum.  The cut points for risk indicate a level of skill below which the student is unlikely to achieve subsequent reading goals without receiving additional, targeted instructional support. Students with scores below the cut point for risk are identified as likely to need intensive support. Intensive support refers to interventions that incorporate something more or something different from the core curriculum or supplemental support.  The DIBELS Composite Score is a combination of multiple DIBELS scores and provides the best overall estimate of the student’s early literacy skills and/or reading proficiency. [NAME] goals and cut points for risk for the DIBELS Composite Score are based on the same logic and procedures as the individual DIBELS measures; however, since the DIBELS Composite Score provides the best overall estimate of a stu dent’s skills, the DIBELS Composite Score should generally be interpreted first. If a student is at or above the benchmark goal on the DIBELS Composite Score, the odds are in the student’s favor of reaching later important reading outcomes. Some students who score at or above the DIBELS Composite Score benchmark goal may still need additional support in one of the basic early literacy skills, as indicated by a below benchmark score on an individual DIBELS Next measure (FSF, PSF, NWF, DORF, or Daze), especially for students whose composite score is close to the benchmark goal.
BEGIN ENTERING DATA BELOW
Number of Students in October Count:
Number of Students Tested:
ACHIEVEMENT |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | GROWTH
 | Beginning of Year |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Middle of Year |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | End of Year |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Goal |  |  | Beginning of Year compared to End of Year |  |  |  |  |  | Goal
 | Well Below Benchmark |  |  | [NAME] |  |  | At or Above Benchmark |  |  | Totals |  | Well Below Benchmark |  |  | [NAME] |  |  | At or Above Benchmark |  |  | Totals |  | Well Below Benchmark |  |  | [NAME] |  |  | At or Above Benchmark |  |  | Totals |  | End of Year Goal: More than 50% of Students on Track on Grade at End of Year (Red=No, Green=Yes) |  |  | Well Below Benchmark |  | [NAME] |  | At or Above Benchmark |  | End of Year Goal: Reduce Number of Students Reading Well Below Benchmark and [NAME] by 50%. Met goal? (Red=No, Green=Yes)
Grade | Cut Score | # of Students Meeting Cut Score | % of Students Meeting Cut Score | Cut Score | # of Students Meeting Cut Score | % of Students Meeting Cut Score | Cut Score | # of Students Meeting Cut Score | % of Students Meeting Cut Score | Total # of Students Tested | % of Students At or Above Benchmark | Cut Score | # of Students Meeting Cut Score | % of Students Meeting Cut Score | Cut Score | # of Students Meeting Cut Score | % of Students Meeting Cut Score | Cut Score | # of Students Meeting Cut Score | % of Students Meeting Cut Score | Total # of Students Tested | % of Students At or Above Benchmark | Cut Score | # of Students Meeting Cut Score | % of Students Meeting Cut Score | Cut Score | # of Students Meeting Cut Score | % of Students Meeting Cut Score | Cut Score | # of Students Meeting Cut Score | % of Students Meeting Cut Score | Total # of Students Tested | % of Students At or Above Benchmark | # of Students at end of Year At or Above Benchmark | Total # of Students Tested at end of year | % of students with expected odds of being on track on grade at end of year | Change in # of Students Meeting Cut Score | Change in % of Students Meeting Cut Score | Change in # of Students Meeting Cut Score | Change in % of Students Meeting Cut Score | Change in # of Students Meeting Cut Score | Change in % of Students Meeting Cut Score | % of Students Reading Well Below Benchmark and [NAME] in Beginning of Year | Goal % Based on 50% Decline in students Reading Well Below Benchmark and [NAME] from Beginning of Year Data | % Change in Students Reading Well Below Benchmark and [NAME]
K | 0 |  |  | 13 |  |  | 26 |  |  |  |  | 0 |  |  | 85 |  |  | 122 |  |  |  |  | 0 |  |  | 89 |  |  | 119
1 | 0 |  |  | 97 |  |  | 113 |  |  |  |  | 0 |  |  | 100 |  |  | 130 |  |  |  |  | 0 |  |  | 111 |  |  | 155
2 | 0 |  |  | 109 |  |  | 141 |  |  |  |  | 0 |  |  | 145 |  |  | 190 |  |  |  |  | 0 |  |  | 180 |  |  | 238
3 | 0 |  |  | 180 |  |  | 220 |  |  |  |  | 0 |  |  | 235 |  |  | 285 |  |  |  |  | 0 |  |  | 280 |  |  | 330
4 | 0 |  |  | 245 |  |  | 290 |  |  |  |  | 0 |  |  | 290 |  |  | 330 |  |  |  |  | 0 |  |  | 330 |  |  | 391
5 | 0 |  |  | 258 |  |  | 357 |  |  |  |  | 0 |  |  | 310 |  |  | 372 |  |  |  |  | 0 |  |  | 340 |  |  | 415
6 | 0 |  |  | 280 |  |  | 344 |  |  |  |  | 0 |  |  | 285 |  |  | 358 |  |  |  |  | 0 |  |  | 324 |  |  | 380