Barber Sped Hub
← Hub
Reading Battery Comparison
CTOPP-2 · TOWRE-2 · GORT-5 · TOC-2 — Decision Guide & Subtest Explorer
— subtests
← Hub

CTOPP-2 answers why a student can't decode. TOWRE-2 answers how fast. GORT-5 answers how well in connected text. TOC-2 answers how they store words visually. Use the matrix and subtest explorer below to build the right reading battery for your evaluation question.

Battery Snapshot
🔊
CTOPP-2
Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing, 2nd Ed.
Ages 5–24
Composites SS · M=100
Subtests Scaled · M=10
Measures
Phonological processing foundations underlying word decoding: phonological awareness (PA), phonological memory (PM), and rapid automatized naming (RAN/RNSN).
Key Composites
Phonological Awareness Phonological Memory Rapid Symbolic Naming Rapid Non-Symbolic Naming
Score Labels
High Average · Average · Low Average · Low · Very Low
Required for dyslexia Phonological processing evidence for SLD-BR/RF eligibility per Texas Dyslexia Handbook
⚡
TOWRE-2
Test of Word Reading Efficiency, 2nd Ed.
Ages 6–24
All scores SS · M=100
⏱ Timed (45 sec)
Measures
Timed word-reading efficiency: sight word automaticity (SWE — real words) and phonemic decoding speed (PDE — nonsense words). Each is a 45-second reading list.
Key Scores
TWRE Composite SWE — sight words PDE — decoding
Score Labels
Above Average · Average · Below Average · Poor · Very Poor
Reading impact Links phonological weaknesses to real-world decoding and fluency deficits
📖
GORT-5
Gray Oral Reading Tests, 5th Ed.
Ages 6–23
ORI SS · M=100
Subtests Scaled · M=10
Measures
Oral reading in connected text — rate (seconds/passage), accuracy (word errors), fluency (rate + accuracy combined), and passage comprehension.
Key Scores
ORI — overall SS Rate Accuracy Fluency Comprehension
Score Labels
Above Average · Average · Below Average · Poor · Very Poor
Fluency & comprehension Especially useful for SLD-RF and SLD-RC documentation
✏️
TOC-2
Test of Orthographic Competence, 2nd Ed.
Ages 6–18
Composites SS · M=100
Subtests Scaled · M=10
Measures
Precision of stored orthographic representations — encoding, storing, and retrieving the visual letter sequences that underlie spelling, sight word reading, and written language.
Key Composites
Orthographic Ability Convention Spelling Speed Spelling Accuracy
Score Labels
Above Average · Average · Below Average · Poor · Very Poor
Dysgraphia & spelling Orthographic processing evidence for SLD-WE and dysgraphia pattern
Which Battery for Which Question?
🔍
Student referred for reading difficulties — suspected dyslexia
UseCTOPP-2TOWRE-2
CTOPP-2 identifies the phonological processing deficit (PA, PM, RAN); TOWRE-2 confirms it manifests as real reading inefficiency. Together they provide the processing and academic impact evidence required by the Texas Dyslexia Handbook.
🐢
Student reads slowly — word-by-word pacing, sounds out everything
UseGORT-5TOWRE-2
GORT-5 Rate and Accuracy reveal whether the issue is pacing (Rate low, Accuracy intact) or word-level errors (both low). TOWRE-2 SWE vs. PDE split clarifies whether the bottleneck is sight word automaticity or phonemic decoding speed.
💡 Add CTOPP-2 RSN/RNSN if RAN deficit is suspected as the automaticity driver.
💬
Student reads accurately but struggles with comprehension
UseGORT-5
GORT-5 lets you compare Fluency (Rate + Accuracy) directly against Comprehension. Intact Fluency with low Comprehension points to a language comprehension deficit — not a decoding problem. This is a distinct pattern from dyslexia.
💡 Follow with oral language measures (WJ-V OL, WMLS-R) to assess language foundations.
✏️
Spelling difficulties, inconsistent written work, possible dysgraphia
UseTOC-2
TOC-2 directly measures orthographic coding — the ability to store and retrieve precise letter sequences. Multiple subtests at scaled ≤7 combined with low spelling achievement supports a dysgraphia pattern per the Texas Dyslexia Handbook.
💡 Pair with WIAT-IV AWF or KTEA-3 Writing Fluency to distinguish orthographic from graphomotor deficits.
🔄
Dyslexia reeval — student improved but still struggles; was it intervention?
UseCTOPP-2TOWRE-2GORT-5
Dyslexia is lifelong. Improved TOWRE-2 or GORT-5 scores reflect intervention response — not resolution. CTOPP-2 typically remains below average even with good outcomes. All three together document the persistence profile clearly for the ARD committee.
⚡
Double-deficit hypothesis — both phonological and naming speed concerns
UseCTOPP-2TOWRE-2
Double-deficit = low CTOPP-2 PA (phonological deficit) AND low RSN or RNSN (RAN deficit). TOWRE-2 SWE typically shows the strongest impact since sight word automaticity requires both pathways intact.
📢
Reads words in isolation but struggles aloud in class / passage reading
UseGORT-5TOWRE-2
TOWRE-2 tests isolated word reading under time pressure; GORT-5 tests connected text aloud. Adequate TOWRE-2 but poor GORT-5 Rate/Fluency suggests passage-level fluency and prosody difficulties beyond single-word decoding.
🌐
Bilingual/EB student — need to assess orthographic coding in English
UseTOC-2TOWRE-2
TOC-2 subtests target English orthographic conventions with less oral proficiency demand than passage-level reading. TOWRE-2 PDE assesses phonemic decoding and can be interpreted alongside WMLS-R CLI findings.
💡 Always contextualize within WMLS-R/CLI language dominance and the C-SEP framework.
Score Pattern Decoder
If you see
CTOPP-2 PABelow Average / Low
TOWRE-2 PDEBelow Average / Poor
📖 Classic Phonological/Decoding Dyslexia
PA deficit is the upstream cause; weak phonemic decoding efficiency confirms it's affecting real-world reading. Most common dyslexia pattern. Strengthened when CTOPP-2 PM is also low.
⚑ Texas: name pattern consistent with dyslexia characteristics
If you see
CTOPP-2 RSN or RNSNBelow Average / Low
TOWRE-2 SWEBelow Average / Poor
⚡ RAN/Automaticity Pathway Deficit
RAN deficit impairs automatic sight word recognition. Low SWE reflects this directly — the student reads slowly even when they know words. If PA is also low, this is a double-deficit pattern with more severe fluency prognosis.
⚑ Texas: document rapid naming as contributing factor
If you see
GORT-5 RateBelow Average / Poor
GORT-5 AccuracyAverage or Better
🐢 Fluency Deficit Without Decoding Breakdown
Student decodes correctly but reads very slowly — an automaticity deficit. Accuracy preserved suggests phonological foundations are adequate; the bottleneck is pacing. Not classic phonological dyslexia — distinguish SLD-RF vs. dyslexia at ARD.
If you see
GORT-5 FluencyAverage or Better
GORT-5 ComprehensionBelow Average / Poor
💬 Language Comprehension Deficit (Not Dyslexia)
Student reads fluently but doesn't understand. This is a language comprehension pathway issue, not word recognition. Points toward SLD-RC or oral language weakness as the driver. Oral language evaluation is the next step.
If you see
TOC-2 subtestsMultiple ≤ scaled 7
Spelling achievementSS ≤ 85
✏️ Orthographic Processing → Dysgraphia Pattern
TOC-2 weakness reflects a deficit in storing precise letter sequences (orthographic coding). Paired with spelling achievement deficits, this is consistent with dysgraphia characteristics per the Texas Dyslexia Handbook.
⚑ Texas: name dysgraphia pattern; pair with graphomotor evidence if AWF also low
If you see
CTOPP-2 PA + PMBelow Average
TOC-2 subtestsMultiple ≤ scaled 7
TOWRE-2 PDE + SWEBelow Average / Poor
📚 Combined Dyslexia + Dysgraphia Profile
Phonological weaknesses drive decoding and reading efficiency deficits (dyslexia pattern), while orthographic coding weaknesses drive spelling/written language deficits (dysgraphia). The Texas Dyslexia Handbook allows co-identification — name both patterns separately.
⚑ Texas: may qualify for both dyslexia and dysgraphia — document separately
🔍
Battery
Domain
CTOPP-2 Composites (Ages 5–6)
Phonological Awareness: Elision + Blending Words + Sound Matching
Phonological Memory: Memory for Digits + Nonword Repetition
Rapid Symbolic Naming: Rapid Digit Naming + Rapid Letter Naming
Rapid Non-Symbolic Naming: Rapid Color Naming + Rapid Object Naming
CTOPP-2 Composites (Ages 7–24)
Phonological Awareness: Elision + Blending Words
Phonological Memory: Memory for Digits + Nonword Repetition
Rapid Symbolic Naming: Rapid Digit Naming + Rapid Letter Naming
Rapid Non-Symbolic Naming: Rapid Color Naming + Rapid Object Naming
TOWRE-2 Scores
TWRE (composite): Sight Word Efficiency + Phonemic Decoding Efficiency combined
SWE: Real words read aloud in 45 seconds — sight word automaticity
PDE: Nonsense words read aloud in 45 seconds — phonemic decoding speed
All three are standard scores (M=100, SD=15); labels: Above Average / Below Average
GORT-5 Scores
Oral Reading Index (ORI): Overall composite — standard score (M=100, SD=15)
Rate: Seconds to read passage aloud — scaled score (M=10)
Accuracy: Words pronounced correctly — scaled score (M=10)
Fluency: Rate + Accuracy combined — scaled score (M=10)
Comprehension: Questions about passage content — scaled score (M=10)
TOC-2 Composites
Orthographic Ability Composite: All subtests combined
Convention Composite: Punctuation + Abbreviations
Spelling Speed Composite: Word Scramble + Letter Choice
Spelling Accuracy Composite: Sight Spelling + Homophone Choice
Composites: standard scores (M=100) · Subtests: scaled scores (M=10)
Descriptor Labels by Battery
CTOPP-2 composites (SS): Very Superior › Superior › High Average › Average › Low Average › Low › Very Low
CTOPP-2 subtests (scaled): Very Superior › Superior › Above Average › Average › Below Average › Poor › Very Poor
TOWRE-2 (all SS): Very Superior › Superior › Above Average › Average › Below Average › Poor › Very Poor
GORT-5 ORI (SS): Very Superior › Superior › Above Average › Average › Below Average › Poor › Very Poor
GORT-5 subtests & TOC-2 subtests (scaled): Very Superior › Superior › Above Average › Average › Below Average › Poor › Very Poor
Subtest Explorer — of subtests shown
🔎

No subtests match your filters

Reference Note: Subtest and composite descriptions on this page are summarized for professional reference by educational diagnosticians. They are paraphrased interpretations based on published test manuals, technical documentation, and professional literature — not verbatim reproductions. Practitioners should consult the official test manual for standardized administration and scoring procedures, normative data, and publisher-approved interpretive language. All test names and battery titles are the property of their respective publishers.