Research has shown curriculum-based measurement (CBM) to be valid and reliable for a number of assessment purposes. This study provides school-based evidence of CBM validity for screening and placement purposes. CBM oral reading fluency and written expression scores for 465 students in Grades 6 and 7 were compared with their year-end English and social studies marks received in Grades 8, 9, and 10. Correlation and regression analyses provided evidence of the predictive validity of CBM scores as indicators of academic performance. Discriminant analysis procedures demonstrated the ability of CBM to differentiate between student groups of various proficiency levels. Overall, our findings supported the inclusion of CBM scores, particularly oral reading fluency, in the assessment information used to make special education screening and placement decisions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anastasi, A. (1988). Psychological testing (6th ed.). New York: Macmillan.
2.
Choate, J., Enright, B., Miller, L., Poteet, J., & Rakes, T. (1992). Curriculum-based assessment and programming. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon .
3.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin,112, 155—159.
4.
Deno, S.L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative . Exceptional Children, 52, 219—232.
5.
Deno, S.L., Marston, D., & Mirkin, P. (1982). Valid measurement procedures for continuous evaluation of written expression. Exceptional Children, 48, 368—371.
6.
Elliot, S.N., & Fuchs, L.S. (1997). The utility of curriculum-based measurement and performance assessment as alternatives to traditional intelligence and achievement tests. School Psychology Review, 26, 224—233.
7.
Espin, C.A., & Deno, S.L. (1993). Performance in reading from content area text as an indicator of achievement. Remedial and Special Education , 14(6), 47—59.
8.
Fry, E. (1968). A readability formula that saves time. Journal of Reading, 11, 513—516, 575—578.
9.
Fuchs, L.S., & Deno, S.L. (1992). Effects of curriculum within curriculum-based measurement. Exceptional Children, 58, 232—242.
10.
Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (1990). Traditional academic assessment: An overview. In R. A. Gable & J. M. Hendrickson (Eds.), Assessing students with special needs (pp. 1—14). New York: Longman .
11.
Gersten, R., Keating, T., & Irvin, L. (1995). The burden of proof: Validity as improvement of instructional practice. Exceptional Children, 61, 510— 519.
12.
Good, R.H., III, & Jefferson, G. (1998). Contemporary perspectives on curriculum-based measurement validity. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement (pp. 61—88). New York: Guilford Press.
13.
Guskey, T.R. (1994). Making the grade: What benefits students?Educational Leadership, 52(2), 14—20.
14.
Hintze, J., Shapiro, E., Conte, K., & Basile, I. (1997). Oral reading fluency and authentic reading material: Criterion validity of the technical features of CBM survey-level assessment . School Psychology Review, 26, 535—553.
15.
Knutson, N., & Shinn, M.R. (1991). Curriculum-based measurement: Conceptual underpinnings and integration into problem-solving assessment. Journal of School Psychology, 29, 371—393.
16.
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.
17.
Marston, D.B., & Magnusson, D. (1985). Implementing curriculum-based measurement in special and regular education settings. Exceptional Children, 52, 266—276.
18.
Marston, D., Mirkin, P., & Deno, S. (1984). Curriculum-based measurement: An alternative to traditional screening, referral, and identification. The Journal of Special Education, 18, 109—117.
19.
McDaniel, E. (1994). Understanding educational measurement. Madison, WI: WCB Brown & Benchmark .
20.
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13—103). New York: Macmillan .
21.
Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741—749.
22.
Schendel, J., & Binder-Reschly, M. (1989). Criterion validity of curriculum-based assessment and correlation with teacher ratings and ITBS scores. Des Moines: Iowa Department of Education, Bureau of Special Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 318 152)
23.
School District #57. (1996). Guidebook for the use of curriculum based measurement in School District #57. Prince George, BC, Canada: Author.
24.
Shepard, L.A. (1993). Evaluating test validity. In L. Darling-Hammond (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 19, pp. 405—450). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association .
25.
Shinn, M.R. (1989). Identifying and defining academic problems: CBM screening and eligibility procedures. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 1—17). New York: Guilford Press.
26.
Shinn, M.R., & Bamonto, S. (1998). Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement: “Big Ideas” and avoiding confusion. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement (pp. 1—31). New York: Guilford Press.
27.
Shinn, M.R., Good, R.H., Knutson, N., Tilly, W.D., & Collins, V.L. (1992). Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading fluency: A confirmatory analysis of its relation to reading. School Psychology Review, 21, 459—479.
28.
Shinn, M.R., & Habedank, L. (1992). Curriculum-based measurement in special education problem identification and certification decisions. Preventing School Failure, 36(2), 11—15.
29.
Shinn, M.R., & Hubbard, D.D. (1992). Curriculum-based measurement and problem-solving assessment: Basic procedures and outcomes. Focus onExceptional Children, 24(5), 1—20.
30.
Shinn, M.R., & Marston, D. (1985). Differentiating mildly handicapped, low-achieving, and regular education students: A curriculum-based approach. Remedial and Special Education, 6(2), 31—45.
31.
Shinn, M., Nolet, V., & Knutson, N. (1990). Best practices in curriculum-based measurement . In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology—II (pp. 287—307). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
32.
Shinn, M.R., Ysseldyke, J.E., Deno, S.L., & Tindal, G.A.( 1986). A comparison of differences between students labeled learning disabled and low achieving on measures of classroom performance. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19, 545—552.
33.
Tilly, W.D., III, & Carlson , S. (1992). Creating measurement materials. In M. R. Shinn, N. Knutson, & W. D. Tilly (Eds.), Curriculum-based measurement training modules . Eugene: University of Oregon.
34.
Tilly, W.D., III, & Grimes, J. (1998). Curriculum-based measurement: One vehicle for systematic educational reform. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement (pp. 32—60). New York: Guilford Press.
