Comparison of grade-level controlled and literature-based maze CBM reading passages

School Psychology Review

Volumn 34, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 387-394

  Brown Chidsey, Rachel ^a,b   Johnson Jr , Paul ^a   Fernstrom, Robin ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN MAINE   (United States)

^b 400 Bailey Hall ^*

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 26644455909     PISSN: 02796015     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. AIMSWeb. (2002). Retrieved August 15, 2002 from: http:/ /www.aimsweb.com/
2. Block, C. C., & Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices. New York: Guilford.
3. Bradley-Klug, K. L., Shapiro, E. S., Lutz, J. G., & DuPaul, G. J. (1998). Evaluation of oral reading rate as a curriculum-based measure with literature-based curriculum. Journal of School Psychology, 36, 183-197.
4. Brown-Chidsey, R., Davis, L., & Maya, C. (2003). Sources of variance in curriculum-based measures of silent reading. Psychology in the Schools, 40, 363-377.
5. Chall, J. S., & Dale, E. (1995). Manual for the new Dale-Chall readability formula. Cambridge, MA: Brookline, MA.
6. Deno, S. (1985).Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 37, 229-237.
7. Deno, S., Anderson, A. R., Callender, S., Lembke, E., Zorka, H., & Casey, A. (2002, March). Developing a school-wide progress monitoring system. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of School Psychologists, Chicago, IL.
8. Espin, C. A., & Foegen, A. (1996). Validity of general outcome measures of second students' performance on content area tasks. Exceptional Children, 62, 497-515.
9. Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1992). Identifying a measure for monitoring student reading progress. School Psychology Review, 21, 45-59.
10. Hintze, J. M., Shapiro, E. S., & Daly, E. J., III. (1998). An investigation of the effects of passage difficulty on outcomes of oral reading fluency program monitoring. School Psychology Review, 27, 433-445.
11. Hintze, J. M., & Shapiro, E. S. (1997). Curriculum-based measurement and literature-based reading: Is curriculum-based measurement meeting the needs of changing reading curricula? Journal of School Psychology, 55, 351-375.
12. Hintze, J. M., Shapiro, E. S., Conte, K. L., & Basile, I. M. (1997). Oral reading fluency and authentic reading materials: Criterion validity of the technical features of CBM survey-level assessment. School Psychology Review, 26, 535-553.
13. Howe, K. B., & Shinn, M. M. (2001). Standard reading assessment passages (RAPs) for use in general outcomes measurement: A manual describing development and technical features. Eden Prairie, MN: Edformation, Inc.
14. Jenkins, J.R., & Jewell, M. (1993). Examining the validity of two measures for formative teaching: Reading aloud and maze. Exceptional Children, 59, 421-432.
15. Shin, J., Deno, S. L., & Espin, C. (2000). Technical adequacy of Maze task for curriculum-based measurement of reading growth. Journal of Special Education, 34, 164-173.
16. Shinn, M.R. (Ed.). (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children. New York: Guilford Press.
17. th ed.). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.
18. Shinn, M. R., Good, R. H., III, Knutson, N., Tilly, W. D., & Collins, V. (1992). Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading fluency: A confirmatory factor analysis of its relation to reading. School Psychology Review, 21, 459-479.