In conjunction with a curriculum-based measurement (CBM) computer program, software was designed to identify 27 phonetic patterns within correctly spelled words and 27 spelling error types within misspelled words. Two applications of this software were examined. First, an analysis revealed similarity among four commonly used spelling curricula with regard to frequency of occurrence of phonetic patterns. Second, 27 teachers were assigned randomly to three 15-week treatment groups: one that used CBM with software providing a skills analysis of error types. one that used CBM with software that allowed visual inspection of errors, and a control group that did not use CBM. Teachers' responses to a post-treatment measure were examined. Analysis of variance indicated that ongoing feedback regarding types of student errors enhanced teachers' correct identification of phonetic spelling errors, a skill considered necessary in designing effective spelling instructional programs. Implications for teacher training and spelling instruction are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 191–215.
2.
Bandura, A. (1978). Reflections on self-efficacy. Advances in Behavioral Research and Theory, 1, 237–269.
3.
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122–147.
Deno, S.L. (1986). Formative evaluation of individual student programs: A new role for school psychologists. School Psychologist Review, 15, 358–374.
8.
Deno, S.L., & Fuchs, L.S. (1987). Developing curriculum-based measurement systems for data-based special education problem solving. Focus on Exceptional Children, 18(8), 1–16.
Fuchs, L.S. (1988a). Effects of computer-managed instruction on teachers' implementation of systematic monitoring programs and student achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 81, 294–304.
Fuchs, L.S. (in press). Enhancing instructional programming and student achievement with curriculum-based measurement. In J. Kramer (Ed.), Curriculum-based assessment: Examining old problems, evaluating new solutions. New York: Guilford Press.
13.
Fuchs, L.S., Deno, S.L., & Mirkin, P.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.
14.
Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (1986). Effects of systematic formative evaluation: A meta-analysis. Exceptional Children, 53, 199–208.
15.
Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (1987). Effects of systematic observation and feedback on teachers' implementation of curriculum-based measurement (Research Report No. 402). Nashville, TN: Peabody College, Vanderbilt University.
16.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Hamlett, C.L. (1989). Computers and curriculum-based measurement: Effects of teacher feedback systems. School Psychology Review, 18, 112–125.
17.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., & Allinder, R.M. (in press). Exploring the contribution of skills analysis to curriculum-based measurement on instructional planning and student achievement in spelling. Exceptional Children.
18.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., & Hasselbring, T.S. (1987). Using computers with curriculum-based progress monitoring: Effects on teacher efficiency and satisfaction. Journal of Special Education Technology, 8(4), 14–27.
Fuchs, L.S., Hamlett, C., Fuchs, D.L., Stecker, P.M., & Ferguson, C. (1988). Conducting curriculum-based measurement with computerized data collection: Effects on efficiency and teacher satisfaction. Journal of Special Education Technology, 9(2), 73–86.
21.
Germann, G. (1985). SHERI [Unpublished computer program]. Sandstone, MN.
22.
Gibson, S., & Dembo, M.H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 569–582.
23.
Gickling, E.E. (1981). The forgotten learner. Nevada Public Affairs Review, 1, 19–22.
24.
Ginn & Co. (1976). Ginn 720. Lexington, MA: Xerox Corp.
25.
Graham, S., & Miller, L. (1979). Spelling research and practice: A unified approach. Focus on Exceptional Children, 12, 1–16.
Larsen, S., & Hammill, D. (1976). Test of written spelling. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
28.
Marino, J.L. (1981). Spelling errors: From analysis to instruction. Language Arts, 58, 567–580.
29.
Morris, D., Nelson, L., & Perney, J. (1986). Exploring the concept of “spelling instructional level” through the analysis of error-type. Elementary School Journal, 87, 180–200.
30.
Norusis, M.J. (1988). Statistical package for the social sciences/PC+. Chicago: SPSS, Inc.
31.
Spache, G. (1955). Spelling errors test. Gainesville: University of Florida, Reading Laboratory and Clinic.
32.
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.
33.
Tucker, J. (1987). Curriculum-based assessment is no fad. The Collaborative Educator,1(4), 4, 10.
34.
Wesson, C.L., King, R.P., & Deno, S.L. (1984). Direct and frequent measurement of student performance: If it's good for us, why don't we do it?Learning Disability Quarterly, 7, 45–48.
