Sources of variance in curriculum-based measures of silent reading

Psychology in the Schools

Volumn 40, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 363-377

  Brown Chidsey, Rachel ^a   Davis, Linda ^a   Maya, Cynthia ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN MAINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0037899580     PISSN: 00333085     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pits.10095     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Blachowicz, C. & Ogle, D. (2000). Reading comprehension: Strategies for independent learners. New York: Guilford.
2. Block, C.C. & Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices. New York: Guilford.
3. Brennan, R.L. (2001). Generalizability theory. New York: Springer.
4. Cronbach, L.J., Gleser, G.C., Nanda, H., & Rajaratnam, N. (1972). The dependability of behavioral measurements: Theory of generalizability for scores and profiles. New York: Wiley.
5. Davis, L.B., Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Whinnery, K. (1995). "Will CBM help me learn?" Students' perception of the benefits of curriculum-based measurement. Education and Treatment of Children, 18, 19-32.
6. Deno, S., Anderson, A.R., Callender, S., Lembke, E., Zorka, H., & Casey, A. (2002). Developing a school-wide progress monitoring system. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of School Psychologists, March, 2002.
7. Donahue, P.L., Finnegan, R.J., Lutkus, A.D., Allen, N.L., & Campbell, J.R. (2001). The nation's report card: Fourth-grade reading 2000 (NCES 2001-499). Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics.
8. Espin, C.A. & Deno, S.L. (1993a). Performance in reading from content area text as an indicator of achievement. Remedial and Special Education, 14, 47-59.
9. Espin, C.A. & Deno, S.L. (1993b). Content-specific and general reading disabilities of secondary-level students: Identification and educational relevance. The Journal of Special Education, 27, 321-337.
10. Espin, C.A. & Deno, S.L. (1994-95). Curriculum-based measures for secondary students: Utility and task specificity of text-based reading and vocabulary measures for predicting performance on content area tasks. Diagnostique, 20, 121-142.
11. Espin, C.A. & Foegen, A. (1996). Validity of general outcome measures for predicting secondary students' performance on content-area tasks. Exceptional Children, 62, 497-514.
12. Evans, J.J. (2002). The relations between measures of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) cognitive abilities and reading achievement during childhood and adolescence. School Psychology Review, 31, 246-262.
13. Foegen, A., Espin, C.A., Allinder, R.M. & Markell, M.A. (2001). Translating research into practice: Preservice teachers' beliefs about curriculum-based practice. The Journal of Special Education, 34, 226-236.
14. Fuchs, L.S., & Deno, S.L. (1994). Must instructionally useful assessment be based in the curriculum. Exceptional Children, 61, 15-24.
15. Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (1992). Identifying a measure for monitoring student reading progress. School Psychology Review, 21, 45-59.
16. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, S. (1988). The validity of informal reading comprehension measures. Remedial and Special Education, 9, 20-28.
17. Hintze, J.M., Owen, S.V., Shapiro, E.S., Daly, E.J., III. (2000). Generalizability of oral reading fluency measures: Application of G theory to curriculum-based measurement. School Psychology Quarterly, 15, 52-68.
18. Jenkins, J.R. & Jewell, M. (1993). Examining the validity of two measures for formative teaching: Reading aloud and maze. Exceptional Children, 59, 421-432.
19. Kame'enui, E.J. (2002). Final report on an analysis of reading assessment instruments for K-3. Eugene OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement.
20. Kincade, K.M. (1996). Improving reading through strategy instruction. Reading Psychology. An International Quarterly, 17, 237-281.
21. Micro Power & Light Co. (1995). Readability calculations: Formula set # 1. Dallas: Author.
22. National Association of School Psychologists. (2002). Learning disabilities criteria: Recommendations for change in IDEA authorization. Communique, 30, 6.
23. National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (reports of the subgroups). Washington DC: The National Institute for Literacy.
24. No child left behind act of 2001: Executive summary (2001). Retrieved 29 January 2002 from http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/esea/exec-summ.html.
25. Pressley, M. (1998). Reading instruction that works. New York: Guilford.
26. Roberts, M.L. (2001). Curriculum-based assessment procedures embedded within functional behavioral assessments: Identifying escape-motivated behaviors in a general education classroom. School Psychology Review, 30, 264-277.
27. Shavelson, R.J. & Webb, N.M. (1991). Generalizability theory: A primer. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
28. st century. School Psychology Review, 29, 485-502.
29. Shin, J., Deno, S.L., & Espin, C. (2000). Technical adequacy of CBM-SR task for curriculum-based measurement of reading growth. Journal of Special Education, 34, 164-173.
30. Shinn, M.R. (Ed.). (1998). Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement. New York: Guildford.
31. Shinn, M.R. (Ed.). (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children. New York: Guildford.
32. Shinn, M.R., Bamonto, S., Cornachione, C., Parker, C., Peterson, K., Thurber, R., & Whalen, A. (1997). Curriculum-based measurement and problem-solving assessment: Training modules (5th ed.). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.
33. Snow, C.E., Burns, M.S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
34. Spear-Swerling, L., & Stember, R.J. (1996). Off track: When poor readers become "learning disabled." Boulder, CO: WestView
35. SPSS, Inc. (2000). SPSS for Windows, Version 10.1.0. Chicago: Author.
36. Stanovich, K. (2000). Progress in understanding reading. New York: Guilford.
37. Stuebing, K.K., Flectcher, J.M., LeDoux, J.M., Lyon, G.R., Shaywitz, S.E., & Shaywitz, B.A. (2000). Validity of IQ-discrepancy classifications of reading disabilities: A meta-analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 469-518.
38. Swain, K.D., & Allinder, R.M. (1996). The effects of repeated reading on two types of CBM: Computer maze and oral reading with second grade students with learning disabilities. Diagnostique, 21, 51-66.