Search

Data-based instruction (DBI) is a process of collecting and using student progress data to guide decision-making related to intervention intensity and individualization for students with learning disabilities (LD). However, effective DBI requires that teachers have a range of knowledge and skills across multiple domains. Past research has shown that data teams can improve teachers' use of data for instructional decision-making. This article describes the use of simulated data teams to build capacity for DBI among pre-service teachers in an undergraduate-level university course focused on intensive reading intervention. Three components are described for each weekly data team meeting: (a) mini professional development session (e.g., instruction led by course instructor focused on key DBI knowledge and skills), (b) data chat (e.g., review and discussion of student data), and (c) completion of a weekly team activity and submission. The structure and implementation of this 5-week, multi-component professional learning tool are detailed.

The purpose of this study was to examine the amount of attention devoted to data-based decision-making in Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM) professional development materials. Sixty-nine CBM instructional sources were reviewed, including 45 presentations, 22 manuals, and two books. The content of the presentations and manuals/books was coded into one of four categories: (a) general CBM information, (b) conducting CBM, (c) data-based decision-making, and (d) other. Results revealed that only a small proportion of information in the CBM instructional materials was devoted to data-based decision-making (12% for presentations and 14% for manuals/books), and that this proportion was significantly smaller than (a) that devoted to other instructional topics, (b) that expected were information to be equally distributed across major instructional topics, and (c) that recommended by experienced CBM trainers. Results suggest a need for increased attention to data-based decision-making in CBM professional development.

Students with and without learning disabilities often struggle to learn a foreign language (FL). Teachers could benefit from a measure designed to screen and identify students at risk for FL learning difficulties. In this study, we examined the reliability and validity of scores from four curriculum-based measures (CBM) as potential indicators of English FL learning: reading aloud, maze selection, and English-to-Dutch and Dutch-to-English word translation. Participants were 133 Dutch students in Grade 8. Criterion variables were English course grades and scores on a standardized achievement test (Cito-VAS). Alternate-form reliability ranged from r = 0.77 to 0.87. Correlations between CBM and criterion measure scores ranged from r = -0.04 to 0.65. Scores from maze selection and reading aloud alone predicted English-language proficiency better than a combination of scores from the four measures, explaining 29.7% and 23.6% of the variance, respectively. Implications for the use of CBM for FL screening and progress-monitoring are discussed.

Data-based decision-making (DBDM) using curriculum-based measurement (CBM) data has demonstrated effectiveness in improving academic achievement for students with or at risk for learning disability. Despite substantial evidence supporting DBDM, its use is not common practice for many educators, even those who regularly collect CBM data. One explanation for its lack of widespread use is that educators may not receive adequate training in the DBDM aspects of CBM. Espin et al. examined the extent to which DBDM is represented in CBM professional development (PD) materials and found that the topic was significantly underrepresented (12% to 14% of CBM PD material content) compared with other CBM topics. The purpose of this study was to conduct a conceptual replication of the Espin et al. systematic review through an analysis of CBM content in practitioner journal articles. The present review includes 29 practitioner articles coded to the four CBM categories used in the Espin et al. study: (a) general CBM information, (b) conducting CBM, (c) data-based decision-making, and (d) other. Results revealed a pattern similar to the one found by Espin et al. with approximately 18% of the content of practitioner articles on CBM devoted to the topic of decision-making. These findings strengthen the recommendation from Espin et al. for increased attention to DBDM in CBM training materials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors examined three instructional approaches for improving teachers' curriculum-based measurement (CBM) graph comprehension, each differing in the extent to which reading the data, interpreting the data, and linking the data to instruction were emphasized. Participants were 164 elementary school teachers who were randomly assigned to one of three CBM instructional approaches or a control condition. Instruction was delivered via videos. Prior to and after receiving instruction, teachers completed a CBM graph-comprehension task. They also evaluated the instructional videos. Teachers in the three instructional groups improved more in CBM graph comprehension than control teachers. Improvements were seen primarily in interpreting and linking the data to instruction, two important but difficult aspects of CBM graph comprehension. Differences between the instructional groups were found for interpreting the data. Teachers evaluated the videos positively. Results indicate that teachers' CBM graph comprehension can be improved via video instruction. Implications for teaching teachers to implement CBM are discussed.

The technical adequacy of CBM maze-scores as indicators of reading level and growth for seventh-grade secondary-school students was examined. Participants were 452 Dutch students who completed weekly maze measures over a period of 23 weeks. Criterion measures were school level, dyslexia status, scores and growth on a standardized reading test. Results supported the technical adequacy of maze scores as indicators of reading level and growth. Alternate-form reliability coefficients were significant and intermediate to high. Mean maze scores showed significant increase over time, students' growth trajectories differed, and students' initial performance levels (intercepts) and growth rates (slopes) were not correlated. Maze reading level and growth were related to reading level and/or growth on criterion measures. A nonlinear model provided a better fit for the data than a linear model. Implications for use of CBM maze-scores for data-based decision-making are discussed.

In this article, the authors review the research on curriculum-based measurement (CBM) in reading published since the time of Marston's 1989 review. They focus on the technical adequacy of CBM related to measures, materials, and representation of growth. The authors conclude by discussing issues to be addressed in future research, and they raise the possibility of the development of a seamless and flexible system of progress monitoring that can be used to monitor students' progress across students, settings, and purposes.

This article reviews research examining technical features of curriculum-based measurement (CBM) in written expression. Twenty-eight technical reports and published articles are included in this review. Studies examining the development and technical adequacy of measures of written expression are summarized, beginning with research conducted at the Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities at the University of Minnesota and followed by extensions of this work. Differences in technical features of writing tasks, sample durations, and scoring procedures employed within and across elementary and secondary levels are highlighted. Gaps in research addressing the technical adequacy of CBM in written expression are identified, and implications for future research and practice are discussed.

This study extended the work on curriculum-based measurement to examine the criterion-related validity of curriculum-based measures in written expression for middle school students, the differences in validity coefficients for various lengths of text, and the sensitivity of curriculum-based measures to change in student performance. Curriculum-based measures were the number of correct word sequences (CWS) and correct minus incorrect word sequences (CIWS) written in expository essays. Criterion measures were the number of functional elements in and quality ratings of student essays. Results revealed a strong relationship between curriculum-based and criterion measures.

The main purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how to apply the Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) technique to multi-wave Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM) measures in modeling academic growth and assessing its relations to student-and instruction-related variables. HLM has advantages over other statistical methods (e.g., repeated measures ANOVA, Structural Equation Modeling) in modeling academic growth. The advantages include allowing more flexible research designs in collecting multiple data points and estimating growth rates and their relations to correlates in more reliable, accurate ways. CBM, as a multi-wave progress-monitoring system, also has distinctive psychometric features that facilitate longitudinal research on academic skill development. These features include provision of multiple data points within short time periods, good validity and reliability, and sensitivity for detecting small degrees of change. Finally, research questions related to assessing the academic growth of students with learning difficulties and using assessment results to improve educational practices for them are discussed.

The purpose of this study was to examine slopes from curriculum-based measures of writing (CBM-W) as indicators of growth in writing. Responses to story prompts administered for 5 min to 89 students in Grades 2-5 were collected across 12 weeks and scored for correct word sequences (CWS) and correct minus incorrect sequences (CIWS). Linear mixed modeling revealed that, for students in Grades 2-3, a linear model with random effects on both intercept and slope fit the data best. For students in Grades 4-5, growth trends varied depending on number of weeks and scoring procedure used. The time point at which slopes were significantly different from zero varied by scoring procedure and grade. Gender was related to intercept and slope for CWS and CIWS in Grades 2-3 and to intercept and linear slope for CWS and CIWS in Grades 4-5. Findings suggest that CBM-W may be appropriate for monitoring student progress, and that gender should be considered in data-based decision making.

In this special issue, we explore the decision-making aspect of "data-based decision-making". The articles in the issue address a wide range of research questions, designs, methods, and analyses, but all focus on data-based decision-making for students with learning difficulties. In this first article, we introduce the topic of data-based decision-making and provide an overview of the special issue. We then describe a small, exploratory study designed to develop a method for studying teachers' understanding and interpretation of Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM) graphs. Specifically, we examine whether think-alouds scored for coherence, specificity, reflectivity, and accuracy differentiate teachers with more or less understanding of CBM data. We conclude the article by discussing the importance of, and the need for, research on teachers' understanding, interpretation, and use of data for instructional decision-making.

Teachers must be proficient at using data to evaluate the effects of instructional strategies and interventions, and must be able to make, describe, justify, and validate their data-based instructional decisions to parents, students, and educational colleagues. An important related skill is the ability to accurately read and interpret progress-monitoring graphs. This study examined preservice special education teachers' graph reading and interpretation skills at two points in time. Participants used a think-aloud procedure to interpret a curriculum-based measurement (CBM) progress monitoring graph, and results were compared to those of CBM experts. Overall, preservice teachers tended to say fewer words than graph experts did. Furthermore, their descriptions of CBM graphs were less sequentially coherent, specific, and reflective. Little change was observed at time 2. Implications for improving teacher preparation in this skill area are discussed.

Teachers have difficulty using data from Curriculum-based Measurement (CBM) progress graphs of students with learning difficulties for instructional decision-making. As a first step in unraveling those difficulties, we studied teachers' comprehension of CBM graphs. Using think-aloud methodology, we examined 23 teachers' ability to "read," "interpret," and "link CBM data to instruction" for fictitious graphs and their own students' graphs. Additionally, we examined whether graph literacy--measured with a self-report question and graph-reading skills test--affected graph comprehension. To provide a framework for understanding teachers' graph comprehension, we also collected data from "gold-standard" experts. Results revealed that teachers were reasonably proficient at "reading the data," but had more difficulty with "interpreting" and "linking the data to instruction." Graph literacy was related to some but not all aspects of teachers' CBM graph-comprehension ability. Implications for training teachers to comprehend and use CBM progress data for decision-making are discussed.

The present study examined the technical adequacy of maze-selection tasks constructed in 2 different ways: typical versus novel. We selected distractors for each measure systematically based on rules related to the content of the passage and the part of speech of the correct choice. Participants included 262 middle school students who were randomly assigned to 1 of the 2 maze formats. Scoring of the maze included both correct and correct-minus-incorrect scores. Students completed 3 criterion-reading tests: the Scholastic Reading Inventory, the AIMSweb R-Maze, and a high-stakes state assessment (the Missouri Assessment Program). Alternate-forms reliability was similar across maze formats; however, with regard to scoring procedure, reliability coefficients were consistently higher for correct than for correct-minus-incorrect scores. Validity coefficients were also similar across format with 1 exception: The coefficients for typical maze scores were stronger when compared with the Missouri Assessment Program scores than the coefficients for novel maze scores.

Although several different reading fluency intervention approaches appear promising for adolescents who are struggling readers, few studies have directly compared various approaches. The purpose of this study was twofold: 1) to determine the relative effects of word-oriented, fluency-oriented, comprehension-oriented, and multi-component interventions on the reading fluency performance of fifth and sixth grade struggling readers; and 2) to examine the concomitant effects of each intervention approach on comprehension. A within participant design, where all 29 participants received all interventions, was used. Outcomes were measured using instructional and transfer materials. The results provide support for a fluency-oriented and multi-component approach.

Many studies have demonstrated the efficacy of reading comprehension interventions for struggling readers, including students with learning disabilities. Yet, some readers continue to struggle with comprehension despite receiving these interventions. In this article, we argue that an explicit link between cognitive psychology and intervention research contributes to knowledge regarding "for whom" and "under what conditions" reading comprehension interventions are most likely to be beneficial. First, we provide a brief overview of a cognitive perspective on reading comprehension. Next, we illustrate an application of this perspective by describing a collaborative project in which we examined interactions among reader characteristics, text properties, and instructional contexts. Last, we highlight directions for future research and implications for practice.

The purpose of this study was to examine the validity and reliability of Curriculum-Based Measures in writing for English learners. Participants were 36 high school English learners with moderate to high levels of English language proficiency. Predictor variables were type of writing prompt (picture, narrative, and expository), time (3, 5, and 7 min), and scoring procedure (words written, words spelled correctly, correct word sequences, correct minus incorrect word sequences). Criterion variables were teacher ratings of writing performance and student performance on the Test of Written Language-III, the writing subtest of the Test of Emerging Academic English, and the Minnesota state writing test. Results supported the validity and reliability of a 5 to 7-min writing sample written in response to a narrative or picture prompt and scored for percent of correct word sequences, correct minus incorrect word sequences, or words written plus correct minus incorrect word sequences.

This study examined the effects of three types of reading interventions on the science text reading of secondary students with learning disabilities (LD). Twenty 10th-grade students with LD participated in the study. Using a within-subjects design, the relative effects of three different instructional approaches--text reading, vocabulary learning, and text reading plus vocabulary learning--were examined and compared with a control condition in which participants received no instruction. The effects of the interventions on reading fluency, vocabulary knowledge, and comprehension were examined. Results revealed that the text-reading and combined interventions had a positive effect on reading fluency and vocabulary knowledge, and that the vocabulary intervention had a positive effect on vocabulary knowledge. Potential effects were found for the comprehension measures. Results imply that students' reading of science text, and knowledge of the vocabulary used in that text, can be improved with direct instruction. (Contains 5 tables and 2 figures.)

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of different types of questioning interventions on students' reading comprehension. Fourth-grade students (n = 246) were identified as struggling, average, or good readers and assigned randomly within school to one of three questioning interventions: two inferential conditions (Causal or General) or one literal condition ("Who, What, Where, When" or W-questioning). Teachers delivered the interventions for 20-30 min, 2-4 times per week, for 8-10 weeks. All readers made reliable pre- to posttest comprehension gains as measured by story recall (ps less than 0.001 to 0.04). Differential effects for intervention were found between two subgroups of struggling comprehenders-elaborators and paraphrasers. Elaborators benefited more than paraphrasers from Causal questioning (d = 0.86) whereas paraphrasers benefited more than elaborators from General questioning (d = 1.46). These findings suggest that identifying subgroups is important in developing and evaluating the effectiveness of reading comprehension interventions. (Contains 1 figure and 4 tables.)

The ability to read and comprehend texts is an essential component of successful functioning in our world. A substantial amount of information comes to us through written means, whether it is through regular print, Internet, or other media. Part of this information is for our enjoyment, part of it is vital for our basic functioning--application forms and tax forms that need to be read and filled out, instructions for operating a new car, prescription instructions, food labels, and so forth. The importance of reading is reflected in school settings, both as a primary means of conveying knowledge and as main target of instruction. Accordingly, the assessment of children's (and adults') ability to read and comprehend texts receives considerable attention, in both school and research settings. (Contains 1 table.)

In this study, we examined the reliability and validity of curriculum-based measures (CBM) in reading for indexing the performance of secondary-school students. Participants were 236 eighth-grade students (134 females and 102 males) in the classrooms of 17 English teachers. Students completed 1-, 2-, and 3-minute reading aloud and 2-, 3-, and 4-minute maze selection tasks. The relation between performance on the CBMs and the state reading test were examined. Results revealed that both reading aloud and maze selection were reliable and valid predictors of performance on the state standards tests, with validity coefficients above 0.70. An exploratory follow-up study was conducted in which the growth curves produced by the reading-aloud and maze-selection measures were compared for a subset of 31 students from the original study. For these 31 students, maze selection reflected change over time whereas reading aloud did not. This pattern of results was found for both lower- and higher-performing students. Results suggest that it is important to consider both performance and progress when examining the technical adequacy of CBMs. Implications for the use of measures with secondary-level students for progress monitoring are discussed.

The validity and reliability of curriculum-based measures in reading as indicators of performance and progress for secondary-school students were examined. Thirty-five grade 8 students completed reading aloud and maze-selection measures weekly for 10 weeks. Criterion measures were the state standards test in reading and the Woodcock-Johnson III Test of Achievement. Different time frames for each measure were compared. Most alternate-form reliability coefficients were above .80. Criterion-related validity coefficients ranged from 0.77 to 0.89. No differences related to time were found. Only maze selection reflected significant growth, with an average increase of 1.29 correct choices per week. Maze growth was related to the reading performance level and to change on the Woodcock-Johnson III from pre- to posttest.

We examined the technical adequacy of writing progress measures as indicators of success on state standards tests. Tenth-grade students wrote for 10 min, marking their samples at 3, 5, and 7 min. Samples were scored for words written, words spelled correctly, and correct and correct minus incorrect word sequences. The number of correct minus incorrect word sequences written in 7 and 10 min yielded the highest reliability and validity coefficients. Tables of Probable Success were created to illustrate the relation between scores on the progress measures and the state tests. Exploratory analyses of differences in correlations between English Language Learners (ELL) and non-ELL students revealed a similar pattern of results for the 2 groups, but correlations were stronger for ELL students than for non-ELL students. (Contains 8 tables and 1 figure.)

Many children struggle to learn to read, and these difficulties can persist well into adulthood. To address this problem, researchers have investigated the processes that underlie reading. An informative body of work has thus identified basic skills (e.g., decoding, vocabulary knowledge) as necessary for successful reading. Researchers also have begun to examine comprehension skills and their contributions to the reading process. In this article we describe research from the cognitive sciences on the processes that underlie higher-order, coherence-oriented comprehension to provide an empirically and theoretically driven perspective for investigating struggling readers' difficulties. We show that this perspective is particularly beneficial in the development and assessment of instructional approaches by relating it to existing, effective interventions. Finally, we demonstrate how our own research activities have derived from this perspective and how preliminary findings extend our understanding of readers' difficulties. This work seeks to address existing challenges in the field of reading comprehension while also suggesting new ways of investigating the plight of struggling readers. (Contains 1 footnote.)

In this study, we examine the nature and quality of students' comprehension of history. Specifically, we explore whether cognitive-psychological theories developed to capture the comprehension of narrative text can be used to capture the comprehension of history. Participants were 36 students with learning disabilities who had taken part in an earlier study designed to investigate the effects of an interactive instructional intervention in history. The results of the original study supported the effectiveness of the intervention in terms of amount recalled. The results of the present study reveal that historical understanding can be characterized as the construction of meaning through the creation of a causal network of events. The study of history within a causal network framework has implications for understanding the nature and quality of students' learning of history, and for potentially identifying sources of failure in learning.

In this article, we review methods of writing assessment, focusing specifically on a method designed for special education: curriculum-based measurement. At the elementary and middle school levels, valid and reliable indicators of performance have been identified. At the high school level, research is sparse and has not yet supported the validity and reliability of the measures. More research is needed on the development of measures at the high school level, on the technical adequacy of the measures as growth indicators, and on the effects of implementation of the measures as they relate to teacher instruction and student performance.

This article describes a curriculum-based measure, vocabulary matching, that can be used to assess the performance of students with reading difficulties in the content areas. Data showing the validity and reliability of vocabulary matching as a measure of performance in the content areas are included. A case study illustrates the use of vocabulary matching in content-area instruction. (Contains references.) (Author/DB)

A study examined the reliability and validity of two curriculum-based measures (CBMs) as indicators of the performance of 58 7th-graders in a content-area classroom. CBM measures were student- and administrator-read vocabulary-matching probes. Results revealed moderate alternate-form reliability for both vocabulary-matching measures. Scores for students with learning disabilities (n=5) were lower. (Contains references.) (Author/CR)

Forty-four preservice teachers viewed one of two videotaped presentations on curriculum-based measurement (CBM), stressing either statistical or anecdotal information to support CBM's validity and utility. Results revealed no effects for presentation format but, in general, participants' beliefs were more positive about the utility of CBM than about its validity. (Contains references.) (Author/DB)

A study examined the technical adequacy of curriculum-based measurement for assessing growth in 43 second-graders whose reading performance was measured monthly over the school year with the maze task. Results showed that the maze task had good alternate-form reliability, sensitively reflected improvement of student performance, and revealed inter-individual differences. (Contains references.) (Author/CR)

A study examined the reliability and validity of curriculum-based measurement indicators in written expression for 112 middle school students. The most reliable and valid predictor of student writing proficiency as measured by both teacher ratings and a district writing test was correct minus incorrect word sequences. (Contains references.) (Author/CR)

Examines criterion-related validity of curriculum-based measures in written expression for secondary students. Finds a combination of measures was better than any single measure for predicting students' general performance in written expression; and 3 measures added to the prediction of students' general writing proficiency (number of characters per word, number of sentences written, and mean length of correct word sequences). (RS)

The author is pleased to have the opportunity to respond to "Measuring Students' Writing Ability on a Computer-Analytic Developmental Scale: An Exploratory Validity Study." The authors of that article have undertaken a challenging project and seem to be on track to developing a technically adequate, practically useful writing progress monitoring tool. The author of this response could reflect on many points throughout the article, but decided to reflect upon one in particular, as alluded to in the title: What is "good writing" and should "good writing" be defined the same for all students? The reflections are presented in this response.