fox in a box: an adventure in literature - Washtenaw Intermediate ...

FOX IN A BOX: AN ADVENTURE IN LITERATURE
DEVELOPED BY:
CTB/McGraw-Hill Company
Describe the instrument in one or two sentences:
Fox in a Box assesses K-2 literacy development based on recommendations of the International
Reading Association, the National Association for the Education of Young Children, the National
Research Council, and the National Reading Panel.
Content and Usage Information:
Subject(s) & Grade(s) (check all that apply)
GRADES K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
S Integrated Lang. Arts X X X
U Reading Only X X X
B Writing Only X X X
J Listening Only X X X
E Speaking Only
C Mathematics
T
S
Other:
Science
Social Studies
Other (specify below)
Subject(s) & Type(s) of Assessment (check all that apply)
ASSESSMENT TYPES P-P P-P P-P Portfolio Performance Tchr. Obs. Other
Item Subtypes SR CR PI
S Integrated Lang. Arts X
U Reading Only X
B Writing Only X
J Listening Only X
E Speaking Only
C Mathematics
T
S
Science
Social Studies
Other (specify below)
Key to Subtypes: P-P: Paper and Pencil
SR: Selected response (multiple choice, T/F, matching, etc.)
CR:
PI:
Constructed response (fill-in-the blank, short answer, extended response, etc.)
Physical Investigation (science experiment, manipulative, etc.)
Type of Administration X Individual X Group

Curriculum and instructional alignment (Check all that apply.)
Michigan Curriculum Framework, describe any documentation
X National or professional association, specify See description, above.
Local, specify
X Commercial, specify
Fox in a Box is based on Marilyn Jager Adams’ four critical literacy
benchmarks: Phonemic Awareness, Phonics, Reading and Oral Expression,
and Listening and Writing. Each area can be assessed separately.
Textbooks/series, specify
Intended uses (Check all that apply. Double check primary uses.)
X Inform instruction X Determine student strengths and weaknesses
X Report to parents X Evaluate short-term growth
X Diagnose curriculum X Evaluate longer-term growth
X Generate trend data X Measure year-to-year growth
Generate Title I data X Communicate between grade levels
X Measure school improvement X Communicate between schools
Inform counseling and placement decisions, including summer school
X Meet the Michigan 1-5 testing mandate
Other
Have accommodations been established for special education students?
Yes, describe
X No
Have accommodations been established for ESL students?
Yes, describe
X No
Cost Information
To obtain materials: A reusable testing kit for 30 students costs $300.00. The cost of testing materials after
purchase of the reusable kit is $1.00 per student.
To score: An examiner’s manual and running record materials provide all scoring templates and rubrics
required to score the test locally.
Administration Information
Time(s) of year to administer
This test is usually given over 2-3 weeks at the middle and end of the school
year.
Forms available X One Two More
Time needed to administer
Testing Time Approximately 60 minutes per child
Check one: Prescribed X Estimated
Pre- and post-test administration time To be given at the middle and end of each K-2 school year.
Training required to administer
How much training is needed?
Special personnel needed
No prior training is needed. A training video is provided in the testing
kit.

Scoring/Report Form Information
Scoring
Where? X Done locally Sent out to
Turn around time
How? Machine scan X Manual answer key X Scoring rubrics
Other
Machine scoring and reporting:
Describe options available
Data generated
X Raw scores
X Percent correct
Percentiles
Grade levels
Scale scores
X Other Mastery scores by literacy area
Reports compiled
X Individual Class Grade School District X Parent
Additional information available, describe
Technical Data
Has field testing been done?
X Yes, describe Development tryout in major city school districts throughout the United States
No
Is there evidence that this instrument is developmentally appropriate for children at the recommended age?
Received the Director’s Choice award of the Early Childhood News as one of
X Yes, describe the best early education products of 1999-2000
No
Is there evidence that this instrument generates useful information for teachers?
Very high national sales volume within the limited time it has been available to
X Yes, describe teachers
No
Have bias reviews been conducted (cultural, ethnic, racial, gender, etc.)?
Yes, describe
X No
Has this instrument been used for summer school decisions?
Yes, describe
No
Comparisons can be made
X From grade to grade for an individual
From cohort to cohort

At this time is statistical data available on inter-rater reliability?
Yes, describe
X No
At this time is statistical data available on other reliability?
X Yes, describe This information is provided within the test’s technical manual.
No
At this time is statistical data available on validity?
X Yes, describe This information is provided within the test’s technical manual.
No
At this time is statistical data available on the correlation with MEAP scores?
Yes, describe
X No
Development and Availability Information
Developer
CTB/McGraw-Hill Company
Developed by
X
Local or intermediate district
MDE/university/research institution
Commercial publisher
Date of original publication 1999 Most recent revision 2000
Estimated number of districts that have used the instrument
Approximately 40 in Michigan
Plans for revision?
X Yes, when? 2003
No
Availability
X
For purchase (See Cost section above)
Free from a website
Other, describe
Name and contact information for obtaining the instrument or more information
Mike LaBay, Evaluation Consultant for CTB/McGraw-Hill Company
Phone 248-620-3852 Fax 248-620-3854 E-mail mlabay@ctb.com
Name and contact information of a person who has used the instrument and would be willing to share
information about the experience
Phone Fax E-mail
Website
Additional information about this instrument that you would like to present