This measurement study examined the construct validity of the retell component of the Texas Middle School Fluency Assessment (Texas Education Agency, University of Houston, & The University of Texas System, 2008a) within a confirmatory factor analysis framework. The role of retell, provided after a one-minute oral reading fluency measure, was investigated by comparing the fit of a three-factor model of reading competence to the data collected on a diverse sample of seventh- and eighth-grade students (N = 394). The final model demonstrated adequate to mediocre fit (chi[superscript 2] = 97.316 {32}; CFI = 0.958; TLI = 0.941; RMSEA = 0.081). Results suggest that retell was a significant contributor to comprehension (Delta chi[superscript 2] = 16.652{1}, p less than 0.001), fluency (Delta chi[superscript 2] = 10.882{1}, p = 0.001), and word identification (Delta chi[superscript 2] = 7.84{1}, p = 0.005). However, the chi[superscript 2] difference was greater for comprehension, as was the factor loading for comprehension (0.250, p less than 0.001) compared to fluency (0.194, p less than 0.001) and word identification 0.167, p less than 0.001). Retell did, however, have a large residual variance (0.938), suggesting it did not function well as a measure of comprehension in its current state with low inter-rater reliability (K = 0.37). Narrative retell scores (0.352, p less than 0.001) were better predictors of comprehension than expository retell scores (from 0.2221 to 0.264, p less than 0.001) or the combination of all three scores (Delta chi[superscript 2] = 134.261{19}; p less than 0.001), but average retell scores produced a more parsimonious model than narrative retell scores alone (Delta AIC = 58.275; Delta BIC = 58.275). Average retell was only weakly correlated to other measures of comprehension (from r = 0.155 to r = 0.257, p less than 0.01). However, the relationship was stronger than the relationship between retell and other measures of fluency (from r = 0.158 to r = 0.183, p less than 0.01) or word identification (r = 0.132, p less than 0.05). In addition, retell did not demonstrate differential item functioning when student characteristics (e.g., primary language, socioeconomic status, ability level) were entered as covariates, even though there were overall latent differences. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://bibliotheek.ehb.be:2222/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]