Estimates of the standard error of measurement for curriculum-based measures of oral reading fluency

School Psychology Review

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 130-146

  Christ, Theodore J ^a   Silberglitt, Benjamin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b Technology and Information Educational Services   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34147169342     PISSN: 02796015     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (59)

1. American Educational Research Association. (2000). AERA position statement: High-stakes testing in preK-12 education. Washington, DC: Author.
2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational and Psychological Research Association.
3. AIMSweb. (2002). Reading curriculum-based measurement (R-CBM) standard oral reading fluency assessment passages. Retrieved October 2003 from Edformation, Inc., http://www.aimsweb.com
4. Bradley, M. M., & Ames, W. S. (1977). Readability parameters of basal readers. Journal of Reading Behavior, 11, 175-183.
5. Brennan, R. L. (2003). Generalizability theory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40, 105-107.
6. Christ, T. J. (2003). The effects of passage-difficulty on CBM progress monitoring outcomes: Stability and accuracy. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences & Engineering, 63, 10. (UMI No. 4960.)
7. Christ, T. J. (2006). Short-term estimates of growth using curriculum-based measurement of oral reading fluency: Estimates of standard error of the slope to construct confidence intervals. School Psychology Review, 35, 128-133.
8. Christ, T. J., & Ardoin, S. P. (2006). Curriculum based measurement of oral reading fluency: Generalizability and dependability of passage sets. Manuscript in submission (copy on file with author).
9. Christ, T. J., Burns, M. K., & Ysseldyke, J. (2005). Conceptual confusion within response-to-intervention vernacular: Clarifying meaningful differences. Communique, 34, 1-7.
10. Christ, T. J., Davie, J., & Berman, S. (2006). CBM data and decision making in RTI contexts: Addressing performance variability. Communique, 29-31.
11. Christ, T. J., & Hintze, J. M. (in press). Psychometric considerations of reliability when evaluating response to intervention. In S. R. Jimmerson, A. M. VanDer-Heyden, & M. K. Burns (Eds.), Response to intervention handbook. New York: Springer.
12. Christ, T. J., & Vining, O. (2006). Curriculum-based measurement procedures to develop multiple-skill mathematics computation probes: Evaluation of random and stratified stimulus-set arrangements. School Psychology Review, 35, 387-400.
13. Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace.
14. Cronbach, L. J. (1984). Essentials of psychological testing (3rd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
15. Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219-232.
16. Deno, S. L. (1986). Formative evaluation of individual student programs: A new role for school psychologists. School Psychology Review, 15, 358-374.
17. Deno, S. L. (1989). Curriculum-based measurement and special education services: A fundamental and direct relationship. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 1-17). New York: Guilford Press.
18. Deno, S. L. (2002). Problem solving as best practices. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology IV (pp. 37-56). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
19. Deno, S. L., Marston, D., & Tindal, G. (1985). Direct and frequent curriculum-based measurement: An alternative for educational decision making. Special Services in the Schools, 2, 5-27.
20. Deno, S. L., Mirkin, P. K., & Chiang, B. (1982). Identifying valid measures of reading. Exceptional Children. 49, 36-45.
21. Derr-Minneci, T. F. (1990). A behavioral evaluation of curriculum-based assessment for reading: Tester, setting, and task demand effects on high- vs. average- vs. low-level readers. Dissertation Abstracts International, 51, 2669.
22. Derr-Minneci, T. F., & Shapiro, E. S. (1992). Validating curriculum-based measurement in reading from a behavioral perspective. School Psychology Quarterly, 7, 2-16.
23. Dunn, E. K. (2002). Examining the accuracy of curriculum-based measurement progress monitoring in reading: Alternative methods for evaluating technical adequacy. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences & Engineering, 62, 3414.
24. EdCheck-up. (2004). Oral reading fluency passages. Retrieved November 2006 from EdCheck-up, http://www.edcheckup.com
25. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., McMaster, K. N., & Al Otaiba, S. (2003). Identifying children at risk for reading failure: Curriculum-based measurement and the dual-discrepancy approach. In H. L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 431-449). New York: Guilford Press.
26. Fuchs, L. S., & Deno, S. L. (1992). Effects of curriculum within curriculum-based measurement. Exceptional Children, 58, 232-242.
27. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Hamlett, C. L. (1990). Curriculum-based measurement: A standardized, long-term goal approach to monitoring student progress. Academic Therapy, 25, 615-632.
28. Good, R. H., & Kaminski, R. A. (2002). Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (6th ed.), Retrieved November 2002 from Oregon University, Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement, http://dibels.uoregon.edu
29. Good, R. H., Simmons, D. C., & Kame'enui, E. J. (2001). The importance and decision-making utility of a continuum of fluency-based indicators of foundational reading skills for third-grade high-stakes outcomes. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 257-288.
30. Guilford, J. P. (1954). Psychometric methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
31. Hintze, J. M. (1995). The utility of curriculum-based measurement for monitoring progress across divergent reading curricula. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities & Social Sciences, 56, 0494.
32. Hintze, J. M., & Christ, T. J. (2004). An examination of variability as a function of passage variance in CBM progress monitoring. School Psychology Review, 33, 204-217.
33. Hintze, J. M., Daly, E. J., III, & Shapiro, E. S. (1998). An investigation of the effects of passage difficulty level on outcomes of oral reading fluency progress monitoring. School Psychology Review, 27, 433.
34. Hintze, J. M., Owen, S. V., Shapiro, E. S., & Daly, E. J. (2000). Generalizability of oral reading fluency measures: Application of G theory to curriculum-based measurement. School Psychology Quarterly, 15, 52-68.
35. Hintze, J. M., & Pelle Petitte, H. A. (2001). The generalizability of CBM oral reading fluency measures across general and special education. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 19, 158-170.
36. 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, 35, 351-375.
37. Hintze, J. M., Daly, E. J., & Shapiro, E. S. (1998). An investigation of the effects of passage difficulty level on outcomes of oral reading fluency progress monitoring. School Psychology Review, 27, 433-445.
38. Hintze, J. M., Shapiro, E. S., & Lutz, J. G. (1994). The effects of curriculum on the sensitivity of curriculum-based measurement in reading. Journal of Special Education, 28, 189-202.
39. Hintze, J. M., & Silberglitt, B. (2005). A longitudinal examination of the diagnostic accuracy and predictive validity of R-CBM and high-stakes testing. School Psychology Review, 34, 372-386.
40. Howe, K. B., & Shinn, M. M. (2002). Standard reading assessment passages (RAPs) for use in general out-come measurement: A manual describing development and technical features. Retrieved October 2004, from www.aimsweb.com
41. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq. (2004).
42. 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.
43. McGlinchey, M. T., & Hixson, M. D. (2004). Using curriculum-based measurement to predict performance on state assessments in reading. School Psychology Review, 33, 193-203.
44. Mehrens, W. A., & Clarizio, H. F. (1993). Curriculum-based measurement: Conceptual and psychometric considerations. Psychology in the Schools, 30, 241-254.
45. Micro Power & Light Co. (1996). Readability Calculations for Windows, from www.micropowerandlight.com
46. Poncy, B. C., Skinner, C. H., & Axtell, P. K. (2005). An investigation of the reliability and standard error of measurement of words read correctly per minute. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23, 326-338.
47. Reschly, D. J., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (2002). Paradigm shift: The past is not the future, In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology IV (pp. 3-20). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
48. Shinn, M. R. (1988). Development of curriculum-based local norms for use in special education decision-making. School Psychology Review, 17, 61-80.
49. Shinn, M. R. (2002). Best practices in using curriculum-based measurement in a problem-solving model. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (pp. 671-698). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
50. Shinn, M. R. (Ed.). (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children. New York: Guilford Press.
51. Shinn, M. R., Deno, S. L., Fuchs, L. S., Germann, G., & Marston, D. (2004). Curriculum based measurement (CBM). Paper presented at the National Association of School Psychologists, Dallas, TX.
52. Shinn, M. R., Gleason, M. M., & Tindal, G. (1989). Varying the difficulty of testing materials: Implications for curriculum-based measurement. Journal of Special Education, 23, 223-233.
53. Silberglitt, B., & Hintze, J. M. (2005). Formative assessment using CBM-R cut scores to track progress toward success on state mandated achievement tests: A comparisons of methods. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23, 304-325.
54. Spearman, C. (1904). The proof and measurement of associations between two things. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 72-101.
55. Spearman, C. (1907). Demonstration of formulae for true measurement of correlation. American Journal of Psychology, 18, 161-169.
56. Speece, D. L., & Case, L. P. (2001). Classification in context: An alternative approach to identifying early reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 735-749.
57. Speece, D. L., Case, L. P., & Molloy, D. E. (2003). Responsiveness to general education instruction as the first gate to learning disabilities identification. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 147-156.
58. Stage, S. A., & Jacobsen, M. D. (2001). Predicting student success on a state-mandated performance-based assessment using oral reading fluency. School Psychology Review, 30, 407-419.
59. Watkins, M. W., Glutting, J. J., & Youngstrom, E. A. (2005). Issues in subtest profile analysis. In D. P. Flanagan & P. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 251-268). New York: Guilford Press.