Using curriculum-based measurement to improve student achievement: Review of research

Psychology in the Schools

Volumn 42, Issue 8, 2005, Pages 795-819

  Stecker, Pamela M ^a   Fuchs, Lynn S ^b   Fuchs, Douglas ^b  

^a CLEMSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 30544447077     PISSN: 00333085     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pits.20113     Document Type: Review

References (46)

1. Busch, T.W., & Espin, C.A. (2003). Using curriculum-based measurement to prevent failure and assess learning in the content areas. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 28, 49-58.
2. Carnine, D.W., Silbert, J., Kame'enui, E.J., & Tarver, S. (2004). Direct instruction reading (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3. Deno, S.L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219-232.
4. Deno, S.L., Fuchs, L.S., Marston, D., & Shin, J. (2001). Using curriculum-based measurement to establish growth standards for students with learning disabilities. School Psychology Review, 30, 507-524.
5. Deno, S.L., Mirkin, P.K., & Chiang, B. (1982). Identifying valid measures of reading. Exceptional Children, 49, 36-45.
6. Espin, C.A., & Tindal, G. (1998). Curriculum-based measurement for secondary students. In M.R. Shinn's (Ed.), Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement (pp. 214-253). New York: Guilford Press.
7. Fuchs, D., Fernstrom, P., Reeder, P., Bowers, J., & Oilman, S. (1992). Vaulting barriers to mainstreaming with curriculum-based measurement and transenvironmental programming. Preventing School Failure, 36, 34-39.
8. Fuchs, L.S., & Deno, S.L. (1991). Paradigmatic distinctions between instructionally relevant measurement models. Exceptional Children, 57, 488-501.
9. Fuchs, L.S., & Deno, S.L. (1992). Effects of curriculum within curriculum-based measurement. Exceptional Children, 58, 232-243.
10. Fuchs, L.S., & Deno, S.L. (1994). Must instructionally useful performance assessment be based in the curriculum? Exceptional Children, 61, 15-24.
11. Fuchs, L.S., Deno, S.L., & Mirkin, P.K. (1984). The effects of frequent curriculum-based measurement and evaluation on pedagogy, student achievement, and student awareness of learning. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 449-460.
12. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Compton, D.L. (2004). Monitoring early reading development in first grade: Word identification fluency versus nonsense word fluency. Exceptional Children, 71, 7-21.
13. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Hamlett, C.L. (1988). Effects of computer-managed instruction on teachers' implementation of systematic monitoring programs and student achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 81, 294-304.
14. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Hamlett, C.L. (1989a). Effects of alternative goal structures within curriculum-based measurement. Exceptional Children, 55, 429-438.
15. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Hamlett, C.L. (1989b). Effects of instrumental use of curriculum-based measurement to enhance instructional programs. Remedial and Special Education, 10, 43-52.
16. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Hamlett, C.L. (1989c). Monitoring reading growth using student recalls: Effects of two teacher feedback systems. Journal of Educational Research. 83, 103-111.
17. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., & Ferguson, C. (1992). Effects of expert system consultation within curriculum-based measurement using a reading maze task. Exceptional Children, 58, 436-450.
18. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., Phillips, N.B., & Bentz, J. (1994). Classwide curriculum-based measurement: Helping general educators meet the challenge of student diversity. Exceptional Children, 60, 518-537.
19. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., Phillips, N.B., Karns, K., & Dutka, S. (1997). Enhancing students' helping behavior during peer-mediated instruction with conceptual mathematical explanations. Elementary School Journal, 97, 223-249.
20. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., & Stecker, P.M. (1990). The role of skills analysis in curriculum-based measurement in math. School Psychology Review, 19, 6-22.
21. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., & Stecker, P.M. (1991). Effects of curriculum-based measurement and consultation on teacher planning and student achievement in mathematics operations. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 617-641.
22. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., Stecker, P.M., & Ferguson, C. (1988). Conducting curriculum-based measurement with computerized data collection: Effects on efficiency and teacher satisfaction. Journal of Special Education Technology, 9, 73-86.
23. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., Thompson, A., Roberts, P.H., Kubek, P., & Stecker, P.M. (1994). Technical features of a mathematics concepts and applications curriculum-based measurement system. Diagnostique, 19, 23-49.
24. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., Walz, L., & Germann, G. (1993). Formative evaluation of academic progress: How much growth can we expect? School Psychology Review, 22, 27-48.
25. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M.K., & Hamlett, C.L. (2003). The potential for diagnostic analysis within curriculum-based measurement. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 28, 13-22.
26. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. (1988). The validity of informal reading comprehension measures. Remedial and Special Education, 9, 20-28.
27. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Phillips, N.B., Hamlett, C.L., & Karns, K. (1995). Acquisition and transfer effects of classwide peer-assisted learning strategies in mathematics for students with varying learning histories. School Psychology Review, 24, 604-620.
28. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Speece, D.L. (2002). Treatment validity as a unifying construct for identifying learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25, 33-45.
29. Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Stecker, P.M. (1989). Effects of curriculum-based measurement on teachers' instructional planning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22(1), 51-59.
30. Gardner, E.F., Rudman, H.C., Karlsen, B., & Merwin, J.C. (1982). Stanford Achievement Test (7th Ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
31. Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § I401 et seq.
32. Jones, E.D., & Krouse, J.P. (1988). The effectiveness of data-based instruction by student teachers in classrooms for pupils with mild learning handicaps. Teacher Education and Special Education, 11, 9-19.
33. Kaminski, R.A., & Good, R.H., III. (1998). Assessing early literacy skills in a problem-solving model: Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills. In M.R. Shinn, (Ed.). Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement (pp. 113-142). New York: Guilford Press.
34. Karlsen, B., Madden, R., & Gardner, E.F. (1976). The Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
35. King, R.P., Deno, S.L., Mirkin, P.K., & Wesson, C. (1983). The effects of training teachers in the use of formative evaluation in reading: An experimental-control comparison (Report No. 111). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 236189)
36. Lembke, E., Deno, S.L., & Hall, K. (2003). Identifying an indicator of growth in early writing proficiency for elementary students. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 28, 23-35.
37. Marston, D.B. (1989). A curriculum-based measurement approach to assessing academic performance: What it is and why do it. In M.R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 18-78). New York: Guilford Press.
38. Shinn, M.R. (Ed.). (1989a). Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children. New York: Guilford Press.
39. Shinn, M.R. (1989b). Identifying and defining academic problems: CBM screening and eligibility procedures. In M.R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 90-129). New York: Guilford Press.
40. Skiba, R., Wesson, C., & Deno, S.L. (1982). The effects of training teachers in the use of formative evaluation in reading: An experimental-control comparison (Report No. 88). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 228821)
41. Stecker, P.M. (2000, April). Utility of "Decodable Names Lists" for assessing beginning reading skills. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Council for Exceptional Children, Vancouver, British Columbia.
42. Stecker, P.M., & Fuchs, L.S. (2000). Effecting superior achievement using curriculum-based measurement: The importance of individual progress monitoring. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15, 128-134.
43. Tindal, G. (1992). Evaluating instructional programs using curriculum-based measurement. Preventing School Failure, 36, 39-44.
44. Tindal, G., Fuchs, L.S., Christenson, S., Mirkin, P.K., & Deno, S.L. (1981). The relationship between student achievement and teacher assessment of long- or short-term goals (Report No. 61). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 218846)
45. Wesson, C.L. (1991). Curriculum-based measurement and two models of follow-up consultation. Exceptional Children, 57, 246-256.
46. Wesson, C.L., King, R.P., & Deno, S.L. (1984). Direct and frequent measurement: If it's so good for us, why don't we use it? Learning Disability Quarterly, 7, 45-48.