Crawford, L., Tindal, G., & Stieber, S. (2001). Using oral reading rate to predict student performance on statewide achievement tests. Educational Assessment, 7, 303—323.
2.
Deno, S.L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative . Exceptional Children, 52, 219—232.
3.
Espin, C., Wallace, T., Campbell, H., Lembke, E.S., Long, J.D., & Ticha, R. (2005). Predicting the success of secondary-school students on state standards tests: Validity and reliability of curriculum-based measures in written expression. Manuscript submitted for publication.
4.
Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (2006). Introduction to responsiveness-to-intervention: What, why, and how valid is it?Reading Research Quarterly , 41, 92—99.
5.
Hintze, J.M., & Silberglitt, B. (2005). A longitudinal examination of the diagnostic accuracy and predictive validity of R-CBM and high-stakes testing. School Psychology Review, 34, 372—386.
6.
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 Press.
7.
McGlinchey, M.T., & Hixson, M.D. (2004). Using curriculum-based measurement to predict performance on state assessments in reading. School Psychology Review, 33, 193—203.
8.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. 70 § 6301 et seq. (2002)
9.
Nolet, V., & McLaughlin, M.J. (2000). Accessing the general curriculum: Including students with disabilities in standards-based reform. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
10.
President's Commission on Excellence in Special Education. (2002, July 1). A new era: Revitalizing special education for children and their families. Retrieved September 14, 2006 , from http://www.ed.gov/inits/commissionsboards/whspecialeducation/index.html
11.
Silberglitt, B., & Hintze, J. (2005). Formative assessment using CBM-R cut scores to track progress toward success on state-mandated achievement tests: A comparison of methods. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23, 304—325.
12.
Speece, D.L., Case, L.P., & Molloy, D.E. (2003). The validity of a response-to-instruction paradigm to identify reading disabilities: A longitudinal analysis of individual differences and contextual factors. School Psychology Review, 32, 557—582.