Curriculum-based measurement in reading and math: Providing rigorous outcomes to support learning

The SAGE Handbook of Special Education

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 307-318

  Alonzo, Julie ^a   Ketterlin Geller, Leanne R ^a   Tindal, Gerald ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79951970996     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4135/9781848607989.n24     Document Type: Chapter

References (41)

1. Busch, R., and Espin, C. A.Using curriculum-based measurement to prevent failure and assess learning in the content areas. Assessment for Effective Intervention 28 (3-4) (2003). 49-58.
2. Carroll, L.(1865/1992). Alice in wonderland. New York: Penguin Books.
3. Clarke, B., and Shinn, M. R.A preliminary investigation into the identification and development of early mathematics curriculum-based measurement. School Psychology Review 33 (2) (2004). 234-248.
4. Deno, S. L, and Fuchs, L. S.Developing curriculum-based measurement systems for data-based special education problem solving. Focus on Exceptional Children 19 (8) (1987). 1-15.
5. Deno, S. L, and Mirkin, P. M.(1977). Data based program modification. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Leadership Training Institute/Special Education.
6. Espin, C. A., and Deno, S. L.Curriculum based measures for secondary students. Utility and task specificity of text-based reading and vocabulary measures for predicting performance on content-area tasks. Diagnostique 20 (1994-1995). 121-142.
7. Espin, C. A., and Foegen, A.Validity of general outcome measures for predicting secondary students' performance on content area tasks. Exceptional Children 62 (6) (1996). 497-514.
8. Espin, C. A., Busch, T. W., Shin, J., and Kruschwitz, R.Curriculum-based measurement in the content areas: Validity of vocabulary-matching as an indicator of performance in social studies. Learning Disabilities: Research and Practice 16 (3) (2001). 142-151.
9. Fewster, S., and Macmillan, P. D.School-based evidence for the validity of curriculum-based measurement of reading and writing. Remedial and Special Education 23 (3) (2002). Retrieved January 24, 2005 from http://b11.epnet.com
10. Fiala, C. L, and Sheridan, S. M.Parent involvement and reading: Using curriculum-based measurement to assess the effects of paired reading. Psychology in the Schools 40 (2003). 613-626.
11. Foegen, A., Espin, C. A, Allinder, R. M., and Markell, M. A.Translating research into practice: Preservice teachers' beliefs about curriculum-based measurement. Journal of Special Education 34 (2001). 226-236.
12. Fry, E., Kress, J., and Fountoukidis, D. L.(2000). The reading teacher's book of lists. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
13. Fuchs, L. S., and Fuchs, D.The role of skills analysis in curriculum-based measurement in math. School Psychology Review 19 (1) (1990). Retrieved January 15, 2005 from http://search.epnet.com
14. Fuchs, L. S., and Fuchs, D.Formative evaluation of academic progress: How much growth can we expect? School Psychology Review 22 (1) (1993). Retrieved January 15, 2005 from http://search.epnet.com
15. Fuchs, L. S., and Fuchs, D.Use of curriculum-based measurement in identifying students with disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children 30 (3) (1997). Retrieved January 24, 2005 from http://b11.epnet.com
16. Fuchs, L. S., Deno, S. L, and Marston, D.Improving the reliability of curriculum-based measures of academic skills for psychoeducational decision-making. Diagnostique 8 (1983). 135-149.
17. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L, Thompson, A., Roberts, P. H., Kubek, P., and Stecker, P. M.Technical features of a mathematical concepts and applications curriculum-based measurement system. Diagnostique 19 (4) (1994). 23-49.
18. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., and Hamlett, C. L.The potential for diagnostic analysis within curriculum-based measurement. Assessment for Effective Intervention 28 (3and4) (2003). 13-22.
19. Fuchs, L. S., Hamlett, C., and Fuchs, D.(1998). Monitoring basic skills. Austin, TX: ProEd.
20. Gickling, A., and Havertape, V.(1980). Curriculum-based assessment. Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
21. Hasbrouck, J., and Tindal, G. (In press). Oral reading fluency norms: a valuable tool for reading teachers. The Reading Teacher.
22. Helwig, R.(2002). A methodology for creating an alternate assessment system using modified measures. In G.Tindal, and T.Haladyna (Eds.), Large scale assessment programs for all students: Development, implementation, and analysis (pp. 427-452). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
23. Helwig, B., Anderson, L., and Tindal, G.Using a concept-grounded, curriculum-based measure in mathematics to predict statewide test scores for middle school students with learning disabilities. The Journal of Special Education 36 (2) (2002). 102-112.
24. Hintze, J. M., Christ, T. J., and Keller, L. A.The generalizability of CBM survey-level mathematics assessments: Just how many samples do we need? School Psychology Review 31 (2002). 514-528.
25. Hollenbeck, K.(2002). Determining when test alterations are valid accommodations or modifications for large-scale assessment. In G.Tindal, and T.Haladyna (Eds.), Large scale assessment programs for all students: Development, implementation, and analysis (pp. 395-426). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
26. Howell, K., and Kaplan, J.(1979). Curriculum based evaluation. Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill.
27. Howell, K., and Nolet, V.(1998). Curriculum-based evaluation for teachers. Boston, MA: Allyn Bacon.
28. Jenkins, J. R., and Jewell, M.Examining the validity of two measures for formative teaching: Reading aloud and maze. Exceptional Children 59 (1993). 421-432.
29. Kame'enui, E. J., Simmons, D. C, and Coyne, M. D.Intervention issues: schools as host environments: toward a schoolwide reading improvement model. Annals of Dyslexia 50 (2000). 31-51.
30. Linn, R., and Gronlund, N. E.(2000). Measurement and assessment in teaching. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
31. Marston, D.(1989). Technical adequacy of reading measures. In M.Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement (pp. 120-154). New York: Guilford.
32. Parker, R., Hasbrouck, J., and Tindal, G.The maze as a classroom-based reading measure: Construction methods, reliability, and validity. The Journal of Special Education 26 (2) (1992). 195-218.
33. Popham, J.(2002). Classroom assessment. Boston, MA: Allyn Bacon.
34. Pretti-Frontczak, K., and Bricker, D.Enhancing the quality of individualized education plan (IEP) goals and objectives. Journal of Early Intervention 23 (2000). 92-105.
35. Pretti-Frontczak, K., Kowalski, K., and Brown, R. D./Preschool teachers' use of assessments and curricula: A statewide examination. Council for Exceptional Children 69 (1) (2002). 109-123.
36. Swain, K. D., and Allinder, R. M.An exploration of the use of curriculum-based measurement by elementary special educators. Diagnostique 23 (2) (1997). 87-104.
37. Thurber, R. S., Shinn, M. R., and Smolkowski, K.What is measured in mathematics tests? Construct validity of curriculum-based mathematics measures. School Psychology Review 31 (4) (2002). 498-513.
38. Tindal, G., and Marston, D.(1991). Classroom-based assessment. Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill.
39. Tindal, G., and Marston, D.Technical adequacy of alternative reading measures as performance assessments. Exceptionality 6 (1996). 201-230.
40. Vanderheyden, A. M., Witt, J. C, Naquin, G., and Noell, G.The reliability and validity of curriculum-based measurement readiness probes for kindergarten students. School Psychology Review 30 (2001). 363-382.
41. Yovanoff, P., and Tindal, G.(2006). Scaling early reading alternate assessments with statewide measures. Exceptional Children.