The accuracy of predictions of future student performance on the basis of graphing data on semi-logarithmic charts and equal interval graphs was examined. Predictions made for 83 students on the basis of reading and written expression data collected over 7 weeks were compared to actual data collected for weeks 8, 9, and 10. Analyses of deviations between predictions and actual scores indicated that predictions were more accurate when the data had been graphed on equal interval graphs. Implications for training are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1985). Standards for educational and psychological tests. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
2.
BrandstetterG., & MerzC. (1978). Charting scores in precision teaching for skill acquisition. Exceptional Children, 45(1), 42–48.
3.
CarverR. P. (1974). Two dimensions of tests: Psychometric and edumetric. American Psychologist, 29, 512–518.
4.
DenoS. L.MarstonD., & MirkinP. K. (1982). Identifying valid measures of written expression for use in continuous evaluation of educational programs. Exceptional Children, 48, 368–371.
5.
DenoS. L., & MirkinP. K. (1977). Data-based program modification: A manual. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
6.
DenoS. L.MirkinP. K., & ChiangB. (1982). Identifying valid measures of reading. Exceptional Children, 49, 36–45.
7.
FuchsL. S.DenoS. L., & MirkinP. K. (1984). The effects of frequent curriculum-based measurement and evaluation on pedagogy, student achievement, and student awareness of learning. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 449–460.
8.
FuchsL. S., & FuchsD. (1986). Effects of systematic formative evaluation: A meta-analysis. Exceptional Children, 53, 199–208.
9.
GlassG. V.WillsonV. L., & GottmanI. M. (1975). Design and analysis of time-series experiments. Boulder, CO: University of Colorado Press.
10.
GoodR. H., & SalviaJ. (1988). Curriculum bias in published, norm-referenced reading tests: Demonstrable effects. School Psychology Review, 17(1), 51–60.
11.
HarrisA. J., & JacobsonM. D. (1972). Basic elementary reading vocabularies. New York: MacMillan.
12.
HivelyW., & ReynoldsM. C. (Eds.). (1975). Domain-referenced testing in special education. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
13.
HowellK. W.KaplanJ. S., & O'ConnellC. Y. (1979). Evaluating exceptional children: A task analysis approach. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
14.
JenkinsJ., & PanyD. (1978). Standardized achievement tests: How useful for special education?Exceptional Children, 44(6), 448–453.
15.
KratochwillT. R. (1978). Foundations of time series research. In KratochwillT. R. (Ed.), Single subject research: Strategies for evaluating change. New York: Academic Press.
16.
LindsleyO. R. (1971). Precision teaching in perspective: An interview with Ogden R. Lindsley. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 3(3), 114–119.
17.
MarstonD. (1988). The effectiveness of special education: A time series analysis of reading performance in regular and special education settings. The Journal of Special Education, 21(4), 13–26.
18.
O'LearyK., & O'LearyS. (1972). Classroom management: The successful use of behavior modification. New York: Pergamon.
19.
PennypackerH. S.KoenigC. H., & LindsleyO. R. (1972). Handbook of the standard behavior chart. Kansas City, KS: Precision Media.
20.
SalviaJ., & YsseldykeJ. E. (1988). Assessment in special and remedial education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
21.
Sulzer-AzaroffB., & MayerG. R. (1977). Applying behavior analysis procedures with children and youth. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
22.
WhiteO. R., & HaringN. G. (Eds.). (1980). Exceptional teaching (2nd ed). Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
