Assessing the instructional level for mathematics: A comparison of methods

School Psychology Review

Volumn 35, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 401-418

  Burns, Matthew K ^a   VanDerHeyden, Amanda M ^b   Jiban, Cynthia L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33750552932     PISSN: 02796015     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Algozzine, R., Ysseldyke, J., & Elliott, J. (1997). Strategies and tactics for effective instruction (2nd ed.). Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing (3rd ed.). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
3. Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
4. Badian, N. (1999). Persistent arithmetic, reading or arithmetic, or reading disability. Annals of Dyslexia, 49, 45-70.
5. Betts, E. A. (1946). Foundations of reading instruction. New York: American Book.
6. Binder, C. (1996). Behavioral fluency: Evolution of a new paradigm. Behavior Analyst, 19, 163-197.
7. Burns, M. K. (2002). Utilizing a comprehensive system of assessment to intervention using curriculum-based assessments. Intervention in School and Clinic, 38, 8-13.
8. Burns, M. K. (2004). Empirical analysis of drill ratio research: Refining the instructional level for drill tasks. Remedial and Special Education, 25, 167-175.
9. Burns, M. K., Dean, V. J., & Foley, S. (2004). Preteaching unknown key words with incremental rehearsal to improve reading fluency and comprehension with children identified as reading disabled. Journal of School Psychology, 42, 303-314.
10. Burns, M. K., & Senesac, B. K. (2005). Comparison of dual discrepancy criteria for diagnosis of unresponsiveness to intervention. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 393-406.
11. Burns, M. K., Tucker, J. A., Frame, J., Foley, S., & Hauser, A. (2000). Interscorer, alternate-form, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability of Gickling's model of curriculum-based assessment for reading. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 18, 353-360.
12. Christ, T. J. (2006). Short term estimates of growth using curriculum-based measurement of oral reading fluency: Estimating standard error of the slope to construct confidence intervals. School Psychology Review, 35, 128-133.
13. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14. Daly, E. J., III, & Martens, B. K. (1994). A comparison of three interventions for increasing oral reading performance: Application of the instructional hierarchy. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 459-469.
15. Daly, E. J., III, Martens, B. K., Kilmer, A., & Massie, D. (1996). The effects of instructional match and content overlap on generalized reading performance. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis, 29, 507-518.
16. Daly, E. J., III, & McCurdy, M. (2002). Getting it right so they can get it right: An overview of the special series. School Psychology Review, 31, 453-458.
17. Daly, E. J., III, Witt, J. C., Martens, B. K., & Dool, E. J. (1997). A model for conducting a functional analysis of academic performance problems. School Psychology Review, 26, 554-574.
18. Deno, S. L., & Mirkin, P. K. (1977). Data-based program modification: A manual. Reston, VA: Council for Exception Children.
19. Enggren, P., & Kovaleski, J. F. (1996). Instructional assessment. Harrisburg: Instructional Support System of Pennsylvania.
20. Espin, C., Deno, S. L., Maruyama, G., & Cohen, C. (1989). The basic academic skills samples (BASS): An instrument for the screening and identification of children at risk for failure in regular education classrooms. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Special Education Program.
21. Foegen, A., & Deno, S. L. (2001). Identifying growth indicators for low-achieving students in middle school mathematics. Journal of Special Education, 35, 4-16.
22. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L., Mathes, P. G., & Simmons, D. C. (1997). Peer-assisted learning strategies: Making classrooms more responsive to diversity. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 174-206.
23. Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Assessing intervention responsiveness: Conceptual and technical issues. Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice, 18, 172-186.
24. Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1998). Treatment validity: A unifying concept for reconceptualizing the identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 13, 204-219.
25. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Hamlett, C. L. (1989). Computers and curriculum-based measurement: Effects of teacher feedback systems. School Psychology Review, 18, 112-125.
26. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Phillips, N. B., Hamlett, C. L., & Karns, K. (1995). Acquisition and transfer effects of classwide peer-assisted learning strategies hi mathematics for students with varying learning histories. School Psychology Review, 24, 604-620.
27. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Prentice, K., Burch, M., Hamlett, C. L., Owen, R., Hosp, M., & Jancek, D. (2003). Explicitly teaching for transfer: Effects on third-grade students' mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 293-305.
28. Gickling, E. E., & Armstrong, D. L. (1978). Levels of instructional difficulty as related to on-task behavior, task completion, and comprehension. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 11, 559-566.
29. Gickling, E., & Rosenfield, S. (1995). Best practices in curriculum-based assessment. In A. Thomas, & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology III (pp. 587-595). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
30. Gickling, E. E., Shane, R. L., & Croskery, K. M. (1989). Developing math skills in low-achieving high school students through curriculum-based assessment. School Psychology Review, 18, 344-356.
31. Gickling, E., & Thompson, V. (1985). A personal view of curriculum-based assessment. Exceptional Children, 52, 205-218.
32. Gravois, T. A., & Gickling, E. E. (2002). Best practices in curriculum-based assessment. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology IV (Vol. 2, pp. 885-898). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
33. Greenwood, C. R. (1991). Classwide peer tutoring: Longitudinal effects on the reading, language, and mathematics achievement of at-risk students. Journal of Reading, Writing, & Learning Disabilities International, 7, 105-123.
34. Haladyna, T. M. (1998). Review of the Stanford Achievement Test (9th ed.). In J. C. Impara & B. S. Plake (Eds.), The thirteenth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 928-930). Lincoln: The University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
35. Harcourt Brace Educational Measurement. (1996). Stanford Achievement Test, Ninth Edition. San Antonio, TX: Author.
36. Harcourt Publishing. (2003). Harcourt Math. Orlando, FL: Author.
37. Hintze, J. M., Christ, T. J., & Keller, L. A. (2002). The generalizability of CBM survey-level mathematics assessments: Just how many samples do we need? School Psychology Review, 31, 514-528.
38. Kaplan, R. M., & Saccuzzo, D. P. (2001). Psychological testing: Principles, applications, and issues (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
39. Manzo, K. K., & Galley, M. (2003). Math climbs, reading flat on '03 NAEP. Education Week, 23(12), 1-18.
40. Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741-749.
41. Murphy, K. R., & Davidshofer, C. O. (2001). Psychological testing principles and applications (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
42. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
43. Reschly, D. J. (1996). Functional assessments and special education decision making. In W. Stainback & S. Stainback (Eds.), Controversial issues confronting special education: Divergent perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 115-128). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
44. Rivera, D. M., & Bryant, B. R. (1992). Mathematics instruction for students with special needs. Intervention in School & Clinic, 28, 71-86.
45. Salvia, J., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (2004). Assessment (9th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
46. Saxon Publishers. (2004). Saxon Math. Norman, OK: Author.
47. Shapiro, E. S. (1992). Use of Gickling's model of curriculum-based assessment to improve reading in elementary age students. School Psychology Review, 21, 168-176.
48. Shapiro, E. S. (2004). Academic skill problems: Direct assessment and intervention (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
49. Shapiro, E. S., & Ager, C. (1992). Assessment of special education students in regular education programs: Linking assessment to instruction. Elementary School Journal, 92, 283-296.
50. Shinn, M. R. (Ed.). (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children. New York: Guilford Press.
51. Shinn, M. R., Collins, V. L., & Gallagher, S. (1998) Curriculum-based measurement and its use in a problem solving model with students from minority back-grounds. In S. N. Elliot & J. C. Witt (Series Eds.) & M. R. Shinn (Vol. Ed.), Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement. New York: Guilford Press.
52. Skiba, R., Magnusson, D., Marston, D., & Erickson, K. (1986). The assessment of mathematics performance in special education: Achievement tests, proficiency tests, or formative evaluation. Minneapolis: Minneapolis Public Schools.
53. Thompson, V. P., Gickling, E., & Havertape, J. F. (1983). The effects of medication and curriculum management on task-related behaviors of attention deficit disordered and low achieving peers. Monographs in behavioral disorders: Severe behavior disorders of children and youth (Series No. 6). Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders, Arizona State University.
54. Thurber, R. S., Shinn, M. R., & Smolkowski, K. (2002). What is measured in mathematics tests? Construct validity of curriculum-based measures. School Psychology Review, 31, 498-513.
55. Tindal, G., Germann, G., & Deno, S. L. (1983). Descriptive research on the Pine County norms; A compilation of findings (Res. Rep. No. 132). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
56. Tucker, J. A. (1985). Curriculum-based assessment: An introduction. Exceptional Children, 52, 199-204.
57. VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Burns, M. K. (2005). Using curriculum-based assessment and curriculum-based measurement to guide elementary mathematics instruction: Effect on individual and group accountability scores. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 30(3), 15-29.
58. VanDerHeyden, A. M., Witt, J. C., & Naquin, G. (2003). Development and validation of a process for screening referrals to special education. School Psychology Review, 32, 204-227.
59. Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Sipay, E. R., Small, S. G., Chen, R., Pratt, A., & Denkla, M. B. (1996) Cognitive profiles of difficult-to- remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 601-638.
60. Witt, J. C., Daly, E., & Noell, G. (2000). Functional assessments. Sopris West: Longmont, CO.
61. Ysseldyke, J. Dawson, P. Lehr, C., Reschly, D., Reynolds, M., & Telzrow, C. (1997). School psychology: A blue-print for training and practice. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
62. Ysseldyke, J. E., & Christenson, S. (2002). Functional assessment of academic behavior. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.