{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025174825174825177, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011188811188811189, 'mean_word_length': 5.913043478260869, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Formative Testing to Teach Children with Learning Problems

• Norm-referenced, standardized testing measures traditionally used by educators and psychologists to asses exceptional children have been widely criticized (Deno & Mirkin, 1980). Although useful for screening and placement purposes, such measures have been called biased, technically inadequate, and inappropriate for individual assessment (Ysseldyke, 1979). Jenkins and Pany (1978) showed that when widely used commercial reading curricula were subjected to certain normreferenced, standardized tests and each curriculum was tested as if it were an individual pupil who had fully mastered the expected skills, not only did individual curricula score either above or below expected grade level, but individual curricula also scored differently on the different tests. Traditional standardized measures typically offer quantitative information (such as grade level) without the qualitative information that will help the teacher plan a specific instructional program. Experience has thus taught many teachers simply to disregard the almost exclusively interpretive data supplied by evaluators (Howell, Kaplan, & O'Connell, 1979) because it has not helped them teach. Norm-referenced tests also offer summative information. To teach efficiently and effectively, teachers need to be able to measure pupil skill in direct reference to the curriculum and during instruction.