Validates a digital decoding tool in Brazilian Portuguese, showing strong psychometric properties and implications for reading assessment.
The early and accurate assessment of decoding is critical for preventing persistent reading difficulties, particularly in large-scale educational systems facing chronic disparities. This study aimed to validate a digital decoding assessment task named Protocolo de Avaliação da Decodificação (PRADE) - Protocol for Decoding Assessment specifically designed for Brazilian Portuguese, a language characterized by high orthographic transparency. The primary objective was to establish the psychometric equivalence of this software-based tool compared to a paper-and-pencil gold-standard test (TDE), while the secondary objective examined its sensitivity to the developmental progression of reading automaticity. A stratified sample of 250 elementary school children (grades 1–5) from both public and private schools was assessed. Results indicated excellent internal consistency (α > .90) and strong convergent validity, with moderate-to-strong correlations (r = .40 to .75) between PRADE and the gold-standard test across all grades. The instrument also demonstrated robust criterion-related validity, effectively differentiating proficiency tiers and teacher-rated academic performance groups. Furthermore, the findings reveal that linguistic variables, such as word length, significantly modulate decoding efficiency (accuracy and speed), even in a transparent orthography. These results reflect the qualitative transition from effortful phonological assembly to autonomous orthographic recognition, aligning with established developmental frameworks. This study validates PRADE as a robust and scalable tool for large-scale monitoring and contributes to a more typologically diverse science of reading by incorporating data from an under-researched, transparent orthographic system.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Soares et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: