Effects of Curriculum-Based Measurement on Teachers' Instructional Planning

Abstract

This study assessed the effects of curriculum-based measurement (CBM) on teachers' instructional planning. Subjects were 30 teachers, assigned randomly to a computer-assisted CBM group, a noncomputer CBM group, and a contrast group. In the CBM groups, teachers specified 15-week reading goals, established CBM systems to measure student progress toward goals at least twice weekly, and systematically evaluated those data bases to determine when instructional modifications were necessary. Contrast teachers monitored student progress toward Individualized Education Program (IEP) goals as they wished and were encouraged to develop instructional programs as necessary. At the end of a 12- to 15-week implementation period, teachers completed a questionnaire with reference to one randomly selected pupil. Analyses of variance indicated no difference between the CBM groups. However, compared to the contrast group, CBM teachers (a) used more specific, acceptable goals; (b) were less optimistic about goal attainment; (c) cited more objective and frequent data sources for determining the adequacy of student progress and for deciding whether program modifications were necessary; and (d) modified student programs more frequently. Questionnaire responses were correlated with verifiable data sources, and results generally supported the usefulness of the self-report information. Implications for special education research and practice are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122–147.

Borg, W.R. , & Gall, M.D. (1983). Educational research: An introduction (4th ed.). New York: Longman.

Casey, A., Deno, S.L., & Marston, D. (1987). Effects of curriculum-based measurement on teachers' beliefs about individualization. (Available from S.L. Deno, 233 Burton Hall, 178 Pillsbury Dr. SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455)

Deno, S.L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219–232.

Deno, S.L. , & Mirkin, P.K. (1977). Data-based program modification: A manual. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.

Einhorn, H.J. , & Hogarth, R.M. (1978). Confidence in judgment: Persistence of the illusion of validity. Psychological Review, 85, 395–416.

Fuchs, L.S. (1987a). Effects of systematic observation and feedback on the implementation of curriculum-based progress monitoring procedures. (Availablefrom L.S. Fuchs, Box 328, Peabody College, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37203)

Fuchs, L.S. (1987b). Improving data-based instruction through computer technology: Continuation application. (Available from L.S. Fuchs, Box 328, Peabody College, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37203)

Fuchs, L.S. , Deno, S.L. , & Mirkin, P.K. (1983). Data-based program modification: A continuous evaluation system with computer software to facilitate implementation. Journal of Special Education Technology, 6(2), 50–57.

10.

Fuchs, L.S. , Deno, S.L. , & Mirkin, P.K. (1984). Effects of frequent curriculum-based measurement of evaluation on pedagogy, student achievement, and student awareness of learning. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 449–460.

11.

Fuchs, L.S. , & Fuchs, D. (1984). Criterion-referenced assessment without measurement: How accurate for special education? Remedial and Special Education, 5(4), 29–32.

12.

Fuchs, L.S. , & Fuchs, D. (1986). Effects of systematic formative evaluation on student achievement: A meta-analysis. Exceptional Children, 53, 199–208.

13.

Fuchs, L.S. , Fuchs, D. , & Deno, S.L. (1986). The importance of goal ambitiousness and goal mastery to student achievement. Exceptional Children, 52, 185–198.

14.

Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Warren, L.M. (1982). Special education practice in evaluating student progress toward goals (Research Report No. 81). Minneapolis: Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 224 197)

15.

Fuchs, L.S., Hamlett, C., & Fuchs, D. (1986). Data-management system [Unpublished computer program].

16.

Gersten, R. , Carnine, D. , & White, W.A.T. (1984). The pursuit of clarity: Direct instruction and applied behavior analysis. In W.L. Heward , T.E. Heron , D.S. Hill , & J. Trap-Porter (Eds.), Focus on behavior analysis in education (pp. 38–57. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

17.

Goodman, L. (1985). The effective schools movement and special education. Teaching Exceptional Children, 17, 102–105.

18.

Hasselbring, T.S. , & Hamlett, C.L. (1985). Planning and managing instruction: Computer-based decision making. Teaching Exceptional Children, 16, 248–252.

19.

Locke, E.A. , Shaw, K.N. , Saori, L.M. , & Latham, G.P. (1981). Goal-setting and performance 1969–1990. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 125–152.

20.

McNeil, J.D. (1967). Concomitants of using behavioral objectives in the assessment of teacher effectiveness. Journal of Experimental Education, 36, 69–74.

21.

Mirkin, P.K. , Deno, S.L. , Fuchs, L.S. , Wesson, C. , Tindal, G. , Marston, D. , & Kuehnle, K. (1981). Procedures to develop and monitor progress on IEP goals. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.

22.

Office of the Federal Register . (1986, July 1). Code of federal regulations, Parts 300–399. Washington, DC: Author.

23.

Peckham, P.D. , & Roe, M.D. (1977). The effects of frequent testing. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 10, 40–50.

24.

Rieth, J.H. , Polsgrove, L. , & Semmel, M.I. (1981). Instructional variables that make a difference: Attention to task and beyond. Exceptional Education Quarterly, 2(3), 61–72.

25.

Rosswork, S.G. (1977). Goal setting: The effects on an academic task with varying magnitudes of incentive. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 710–715.

26.

Salvia, J. , & Ysseldyke, J.E. (1985). Assessment in special and remedial education. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

27.

Thompson, R.H. , White, K.R. , & Morgan, D.P. (1982). Teacher-student interaction patterns in classrooms with mainstreamed mildly handicapped students. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 220–236.

28.

Wesson, C. , King, R. , & Deno, S.L. (1984). Direct and frequent measurement: If it's so good for us, why don't we use it? Learning Disability Quarterly, 7, 45–48.

29.

White, O.R. , & Haring, N.G. (1980). Exceptional teaching (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.