The use of Gickling's model of Curriculum-Based Assessment (CBA) has been shown to increase student achievement. However, data are lacking to support the psychometric adequacy of the procedure. This study examined the interscorer, alternate-form, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability of CBA for reading using 93 elementary school aged children. The data were expressed as a percentage of words known and as conversions to the independent, instructional, and frustrational level based on Gickling and Rosenfield (1995). Results suggested reliability coefficients that exceeded recommended levels for screening instruments and were consistent with the fluency model of CBA. Recommendations for practice and further investigation are included.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Educational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological Association (APA), & National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME). (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: AERA.
2.
Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3.
Betts, E. A. (1946). Foundations of reading instruction. New York: American Book.
4.
Burns, M. K., MacQuarrie, L. L., & Campbell, D. T. (1999). The difference between curriculum-based assessment and curriculum-based measurement: A focus on purpose and result. Communiqué, 27, 18-19.
5.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219-232.
6.
Fagot, R. F. (1991). Reliability of ratings for multiple judges: Intraclass correlation and metric scales. Applied Psychological Measurement, 15, 1-11.
7.
Gersten, R., Keating, T., & Irvin, L. K. (1995). The burden of proof: Validity as improvement of instructional practice. Exceptional Children, 61, 510-519.
8.
Gickling, E. E., & Havertape, S. (1981). Curriculum-based assessment. Minneapolis, MN: School Psychology Inservice Training Network.
9.
Gickling, E., & Rosenfield, S. (1995). Best practices in curriculum-based assessment. In A. Thomas, & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology. (3rd ed., pp. 587-595). Washington DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
10.
Gickling, E., & Thompson, V. (1985). A personal view of curriculum-based assessment. Exceptional Children, 52, 205-218.
11.
Marston, D. B. (1989). A curriculum-based measurement approach to assessing academic performance: What it is and why do it. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 18-78). New York: Guilford Press.
12.
Messick, S. (1988). The once and future issues of validity: Assessing the meaning and consequences of measurement. In H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 33-46). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
14.
Roberts, M. L., & Shapiro, E. S. (1996). Effects of instructional ratios on students' reading performance in a regular education program. Journal of School Psychology, 34, 73-91.
15.
Rosenfield, S. A. (1987). Instructional consultation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
16.
Rosenfield, S. A., & Gravois, T. A. (1996). Instructional consultation teams: Collaborating for change. New York: Guilford Press.
17.
Salvia, J., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (1998). Assessment (7th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
18.
Sattler, J. M. (1990). Assessment of children (3rd rev. ed.). San Diego: Author.
19.
Shapiro, E. S. (1992). Use of Gickling's model of curriculum-based assessment to improve reading in elementary age students. School Psychology Review, 21, 168-176.
20.
Stanley, J. C. (1971). Reliability. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement (2nd ed., pp. 356-442). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
21.
Tindal, G., Marston, D., & Deno., S. L. (1983). The reliability of direct and repeated measurement (Research Report No. 109). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
22.
Ysseldyke, J., Reschly, D., Dawson, P., Reynolds, M., Lehr, C., & Telzrow, C. (1997). School psychology: A blueprint for training and practice II. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
