New and existing curriculum-based writing measures: Technical features within and across grades

School Psychology Review

Volumn 37, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 550-566

  McMaster, Kristen L ^a   Campbell, Heather ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b ST OLAF COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 59549090109     PISSN: 02796015     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (47)

1. Berninger, V. (2001). Process assessment of the learner (PAL) test battery for reading and writing. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
2. Berninger, V., Mizokawa, D., & Bragg, R. (1991). Theory-based diagnosis and remediation of writing disabilities. Journal of School Psychology, 29, 57-79.
3. Berninger, V., Yates, C., Cartwright, A., Rutberg, J., Remy, E., & Abbott, R. (1992). Lower-level developmental skills in beginning writing. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 4, 257-280.
4. Cooper, D., & Pikulski, J. (1999). Invitations to literacy. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
5. Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219-232.
6. Deno, S. L., & Fuchs, L. S. (1987). Developing curriculum-based measurement systems for data-based special education problem solving. Focus on Exceptional Children, 19, 1-16.
7. Deno, S. L., Mirkin, P., & Marston, D. (1980). Relationships among simple measures of written expression and performance on standardized achievement tests (Vol. IRLD-RR-22). University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
8. Deno, S. L., Mirkin, P., & & Marston, D. (1982). Valid measurement procedures for continuous evaluation of written expression. Exceptional Children Special Education and Pediatrics: A New Relationship, 48, 368-371.
9. Deschler, D. D., Ellis, E., & Lenz, B. K. (1996). Teaching adolescents with learning disabilities (2nd ed.). Denver, CO: Love Publishing.
10. Espin, C. A., De La Paz, S., Scierka, B. J., & Roelofs, L. (2005). The relationship between curriculum-based measures in written expression and quality and completeness of expository writing for middle school students. Journal of Special Education, 38, 208-217.
11. Espin, C. A., Scierka, B. J., Skare, S., & Halverson, N. (1999). Criterion-related validity of curriculum-based measures in writing for secondary school students. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 15, 5-27.
12. Espin, C., Shin, J., Deno, S. L., Skare, S., Robinson, S., & Benner, B. (2000). Identifying indicators of written expression proficiency for middle school students. Journal of Special Education, 34, 140-153.
13. Foegen, A., Jiban, C., & Deno, S. (2007). Progress monitoring measures in mathematics: A review of the literature. Journal of Special Education, 41, 121-139.
14. Gansle, K. A., Noell, G. H., VanDerHeyden, A. M., Naquin, G. M., & Slider, N. J. (2002). Moving beyond total words written: The reliability, criterion validity, and time cost of alternative measures for curriculumbased measurement in writing. School Psychology Review, 31, 477-497.
15. Gansle, K. A., Noell, G. H., VanDerHeyden, A. M., Slider, N. J., Hoffpauir, L. D., Whitmarsh, E. L., et al. (2004). An examination of the criterion validity and sensitivity to brief intervention of alternate curriculumbased measures of writing skill. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 291-300.
16. Graham, S. (1990). The role of production factors in learning disabled students' compositions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 781-791.
17. Graham, S., Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Abbott, S. P., & Whitaker, D. (1997). Role of mechanics in composing of elementary school students: A new methodological approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 170-182.
18. Graham, S., Berninger, V., Weintraub, N., & Schafer, W. (1998). Development of handwriting speed and legibility in grades 1-9. Journal of Educational Research, 92, 42-52.
19. Hammill, D. D., & Hresko, W. P. (1994). Comprehensive scales of student abilities. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
20. Hammill, D. D., & Larsen, S. C. (1996). Test of Written Language-Third Edition. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
21. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. (2004). P. L. 108-446 U.S.C.
22. Jewell, J., & Malecki, C. K. (2005). The utility of CBM written language indices: An investigation of production-dependent, production- independent, and accurateproduction scores. School Psychology Review, 34, 27-44.
23. Jones, D., & Christensen, C. A. (1999). Relationship between automaticity in handwriting and students' ability to generate written text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 44-49.
24. Lembke, E., Deno, S., & Hall, K. (2003). Identifying an indicator of growth in early writing proficiency for elementary school students. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 28, 23-35.
25. Marston, D. (1989). A curriculum-based measurement approach to assessing academic performance: What it is and why do it. In M. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 18-78). New York: Guilford.
26. Marston, D., & Deno, S. (1981). The reliability of simple, direct measures of written expression (Vol. IRLD-RR-50). University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
27. Marston, D, Deno, S. L., & Tindal, G. (1983). A comparison of standardized achievement tests and direct measurement techniques in measuring pupil progress (Vol. IRLD-RR-126). University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
28. McMaster, K. L., & Espin, C. A. (2007). Technical features of curriculum-based measurement in writing: A literature review. Journal of Special Education, 41, 68-84.
29. Miller, T. L., & Lignugaris-Kraft, B. (2002). The effects of text structure discrimination training on the writing performance of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 11, 203-230.
30. Minneapolis Public Schools. (2005). Secondary English/ language arts grade level expectations. Retrieved September 23, 2007, from http://ci.mpls.k12.mn.us/6-12-ELA-State-Standards-Grade-Level-Expectations.html
31. Minnesota Department of Children, Families and Learning & NCS Pearson. (2002). Minnesota comprehensive assessments, Grades 3 & 5, technical manual. Retrieved January 25, 2005, from http://education.state. mn.us/
32. National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). Nation's report card: Writing. Retrieved April 23, 2006, from http://nces.ed.gov/ nationsreportcard/writing/
33. National Commission on Writing. (2003). The neglected "R: " The need for a writing revolution. Retrieved March 16, 2007, from http://www.writingcommission.org/
34. National Commission on Writing. (2006). Writing and school reform. Retrieved March 16, 2007, from http://www.writingcommission.org/
35. No Child Left Behind Act (2002). P.L. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425, 2002 U.S.C.
36. Nolet, V., & McLaughlin, M. J. (2000). Accessing the general curriculum: Including students with disabilities in standards-based reform. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
37. Parker, R. I., Tindal, G., & Hasbrouck, J. (1991). Countable indices of writing quality: Their suitability for screening-eligibility decisions. Exceptionality, 2, 1-17.
38. Salvia, J., & Ysseldyke, J. (2001). Assessment in special and remedial education (8tti ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
39. Stecker, P. M., Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2005). Using curriculum-based measurement to improve student achievement: Review of research. Psychology in the Schools, 42, 795-819.
40. Taylor, R. L. (2003). Assessment of exceptional students: Educational and psychological procedures. (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
41. Tindal, G., & Hasbrouck, J. (1991). Analyzing student writing to develop instructional strategies. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 6, 237-245.
42. Tindal, G., Marston, D., & Deno, S. L. (1983). The reliability of direct and repeated measurement (Vol. IRLD-RR-109). University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
43. Tindal, G., & Parker, R. (1989). Assessment of written expression for students in compensatory and special education programs. Journal of Special Education, 23, 169-183.
44. Tindal, G., & Parker, R. (1991). Identifying measures for evaluating written expression. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 6, 211-218.
45. Videen, J., Marston, D., & Deno, S. L. (1982). Correct word sequences: A valid indicator of proficiency in written expression (Vol. IRLD-RR-84). University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
46. Wayman, M. M., Wallace, T., Wiley, H. I., Ticha, R., & Espin, C. A. (2007). Literature synthesis on curriculum-based measurement in reading. Journal of Special Education, 41, 85-120.
47. Weissenburger, J. W., & Espin, C. A. (2005). Curriculumbased measures of writing across grades. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 153-169.