Curriculum-based assessment (CBA), an alternative to traditional assessment practices, offers a system for using curriculum as a diagnostic tool and provides a format for management of instruction. It is based on three central themes: (a) curriculum provides the most basic and meaningful avenue for classroom assessment; (b) curriculum places explicit demands upon the learner; and (c) curriculum must be controlled if academic success is to be achieved. Research on CBA has shown it effective in promoting good classroom performance, especially with mainstreamed, low-achieving children and those with attention deficit disorder.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarkleyR., & CunninghamC. (1979). Stimulant drugs and activity level in hyperactive children. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 49, 491–499.
2.
BettsE. A.Informal inventories. (1952). In Handbook on corrective reading for the American series.New York: Harper & Row.
3.
BloomB. S. (1976). Human characteristics and school learning.New York: McGraw Hill.
4.
BorgW. R.Time and school learning. (1980). In Denham and Lieberman (Eds.), Time to learn.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Institute of Education.
5.
Department of Education, State of Louisiana. (1983). Bulletin 1508. Pupil appraisal handbook.Baton Rouge: Author.
6.
CharlesL.SchainR.ZelnikerT., & GuthrieD. (1979). Effects of methylphenidate on hyperactive children's ability to sustain attention. Pediatrics, 64, 412–418.
7.
DenhamC., & LiebermanA. Eds. (1980, May). Time to learn.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Institute of Education.
8.
GadowK. D. (1980). Children on medication: A primer for school personnel.Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
9.
GerberM. M. (1984). The Department of Education's sixth annual report to Congress on P.L. 94–142: Is Congress getting the full story?Exceptional Children, 51 (3), 209–224.
10.
GicklingE. E. (1977). Controlling academic and social performance using an instructional delivery model. Programs for the emotionally handicapped: Administrative considerations.Washington, DC: Coordination Office of Regional Resource Centers/Mideast Regional Resource Center.
11.
GicklingE. E. (1979, April). Evaluation of classroom teacher's ability to mainstream. Paper presented at the 57th Annual International Convention of The Council for Exceptional Children, Dallas, TX.
12.
GicklingE. E. (1985). The forgotten learner. Nevada Public Affairs Review, 1, 19–22.
13.
GicklingE. E., & ArmstrongD. L. (1978). Levels of instructional difficulty as related to on-task behavior, task completion, and comprehension. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 11, 559–566.
14.
GicklingE. E., & HavertapeJ. F. (1981). Curriculum based assessment. In TuckerJ. A. (Ed.), Non-test based assessment.Minneapolis: The National School Psychology Inservice Network, University of Minnesota.
15.
GreenbergD. E. (1984) The 1984 annual report to congress: Are we better off?Exceptional Children, 51, 203–207.
16.
HargisC. H. (1982). Teaching reading to handicapped children.Denver: Love Publishing, 1982.
17.
How Well Do Textbooks Match? (1980). Communication Quarterly, 3, 2.
18.
JenkinsJ. R., & PanyD. (1978). Standardized achievement tests: How useful for special education?Exceptional Children, 44 (6), 448–453.
19.
KragerJ., & SaferD. (1974). Type and prevalence of medication used in the treatment of hyperactive children. The New England Journal of Medicine, 291, 1118–1120.
20.
LaneK. S. (1975). The modified Dale-Chall formula: A statistical comparison with two other readability formulas on intermediate level basal readers. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
21.
McLoughlinJ. A., & LewisR. B. (1981). Assessing special students.Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
22.
SabersD. (1984). Curriculum referenced tests of mastery. (CRTM): Vol. #3 Technical report. I. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
23.
SmithF.Heading without nonsense. (1978). New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
24.
SpragueR. (1977). Psychopharmacotherapy with children. In McMillanM. & HenaoS. (Eds.), Child psychiatry: Treatment and research.New York: Brunner/Mazel.
25.
ThompsonA. C. (1981). Some counter thinking about learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 14 (7), 394–396.
26.
ThompsonV. P.GicklingE. E., & HavertapeJ. F. (1983). The effects of medication and curriculum on task-related behaviors of attention deficit disordered and low achieving peers. Monographs in behavioral disorders: Severe behavior disorders of children and youth, CCBD, Arizona State University. Series #6.
27.
UllmanD.BarkleyR., & BrownW. (1978). The behavioral symptoms of hyperkinetic children who successfully responded to stimulant drug treatment. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 48, 425–437.
