We investigated the hypothesis that treatment acceptability influences teachers' use of a formative evaluation system (curriculum-based measurement) and, relatedly, the amount of gain effected in math for their students. Twenty-one special education teachers implemented curriculum-based measurement for 4 months. On the basis of their responses to a questionnaire assessing treatment acceptability of curriculum-based measurement, teachers were divided into groups (high- and low-acceptability). We compared the two groups of teachers on (a) five measures of implementation and (b) amount of growth evidenced by their students in math. Results indicated that high- and low-acceptability teachers differed on two of five implementation measures, and that there was a significant difference in the rate of growth effected in their students in math. Implications of results relative to the use of formative evaluation and measurement of treatment acceptability are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allinder, R. M. (1995). An examination of the relationship between teachers' efficacy, curriculum-based measurement, and student achievement. Remedial and Special Education, 16, 189–216.
2.
Allinder, R. M. (1996). When some is not better than none: Effects of differential implementation on curriculum-based measurement. Exceptional Children, 62, 525–536.
3.
Billingsley, F. F., & Kelley, B. (1994). An examination of the acceptability of instructional practices for students with severe disabilities in general education settings. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 19, 75–83.
4.
Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1989). Educational research: An introduction (5th ed.). New York: Longman.
5.
Casey, A., Deno, S., Marston, D., & Skiba, R. (1988). Experimental teaching: Changing beliefs about effective instructional practices. Teacher Education and Special Education, 11, 123–131.
6.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219–232.
7.
Fuchs, L. S. (1988). Effects of computer-managed instruction on teachers' implementation of systematic monitoring programs and student achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 81, 294–304.
8.
Fuchs, L. S. (1989). Evaluating solutions: Monitoring progress and revising intervention plans. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 153–181). New York: Guilford.
9.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Deno, S. L. (1985). Importance of goal ambitiousness and goal mastery to student achievement. Exceptional Children, 52, 63–71.
10.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Hamlett, C. L. (1989). Effects of instrumental use of curriculum-based measurement to enhance instructional programs. Remedial and Special Education, 10, 51–59.
11.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., & Allinder, R. M. (1991). Effects of expert system advice within curriculum-based measurement on teacher planning and student achievement in spelling. School Psychology Review, 20, 49–66.
12.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., & Ferguson, C. (1992). Effects of expert system consultation within curriculum-based measurement using a reading maze task. Exceptional Children, 58, 436–450.
13.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Phillips, N. B., & Bentz, J. (1994). Classwide curriculum-based measurement: Helping general educators meet the challenge of student diversity. Exceptional Children, 60, 518–537.
14.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., & Stecker, P. M. (1990). The role of skills analysis in curriculum-based measurement in math. School Psychology Review, 19, 6–22.
15.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., & Stecker, P. M. (1991). Effects of curriculum-based measurement and consultation on teacher planning and student achievement in mathematics operations. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 617–642.
16.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Walz, L., & Germann, G. (1993). Formative evaluation of academic progress: How much growth can we expect?School Psychology Review, 22, 27–48.
17.
Fuchs, L. S., Hamlett, C. L., & Fuchs, D. (1990). Monitoring basic skills progress [Computer program].Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
18.
Fuchs, L. S., Hamlett, C. L., Fuchs, D., 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, 73–86.
19.
Jenkins, J. R., Mayhall, W., Peshka, C., & Townsend, V. (1974). Using direct and daily measures to increase learning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 7, 605–608.
20.
Jones, E. D., & Krouse, J. P. (1988). The effectiveness of data-based instruction by student teachers in classrooms for pupils with mild learning handicaps. Teacher Education and Special Education, 11, 9–19.
21.
Kazdin, A. E. (1980). Acceptability of alternative treatments for deviant child behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 259–273.
22.
Kazdin, A. E. (1981). Acceptability of child treatment techniques: The influence of treatment efficacy and adverse side effects. Behavioral Therapy, 12, 493–506.
23.
Kazdin, A. E., & Cole, P. M. (1981). Attitudes and labeling bias toward behavior modification: The effects of labels, content and jargon. Behavior Therapy, 12, 56–68.
24.
Lipsey, M. W. (1990). Design sensitivity: Statistical power for experimental research.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25.
Martens, B. K., Witt, J. C., Elliott, S. N., & Darveaux, D. X. (1985). Teacher judgments concerning the acceptability of school-based interventions. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 16, 191–196.
26.
Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (1994). Effective instruction for special education (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
27.
Miltenberger, R. G. (1990). Assessment of treatment acceptability: A review of the literature. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 10, 24–38.
28.
Oats, R. G., & Allinder, R. M. (1995). Validation of the CBM acceptability scale (Tech. Rep. No. 201. Available from the second author).
29.
Odom, S. L., McConnell, S. R., & Chandler, L. K. (1993). Acceptability and feasibility of classroom-based social interaction interventions for young children with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 60, 226–236.
30.
Reimers, T., Wacker, D., & Koeppl, G. (1987). Acceptability of behavioral interventions: A review of the literature. School Psychology Review, 16, 212–227.
31.
Shapiro, E. S., & Eckert, T. L. (1994). Acceptability of curriculum-based assessment by school psychologists. Journal of School Psychology, 32, 167–183.
32.
Tarnowski, K., Mulick, J., & Rasnake, L. (1990). Acceptability of behavioral interventions for self-injurious behavior: Replication and interinstitutional comparison. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 95, 182–187.
33.
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.
34.
Wesson, C., Skiba, R., Sevcik, B., King, R. P., & Deno, S. (1984). The effects of technically adequate instructional data on achievement. Remedial and Special Education, 5, 17–22.
35.
Whinnery, K. W., Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1991). General, special, and remedial teachers' acceptance of behavioral and instructional strategies for mainstreaming students with mild handicaps. Remedial and Special Education, 12, 6–13.
36.
Witt, J. C., & Elliott, S. N. (1985). Acceptability of classroom intervention strategies. In T. R. Kratochwill (Ed.), Advances in school psychology (pp. 251–288). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
37.
Witt, J. C., Elliott, S. N., & Martens, B. K. (1984). Acceptability of behavioral interventions used in classrooms: The influence of teacher time, severity of behavior problems, and type of intervention. Behavior Disorders, 10, 95–104.
38.
Witt, J. C., & Martens, B. K. (1983). Assessing the acceptability of behavioral interventions used in classrooms. Psychology in the Schools, 20, 510–517.
39.
Wolf, M. M. (1978). Social validity: The case for subjective measurement or how applied behavior analysis is finding its heart. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 203–214.
40.
Wolfe, P. S. (1994). Judgment of the social validity of instructional strategies used in community-based instructional sites. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 19, 43–51.
41.
Woolfolk, A. E., Woolfolk, R. C., & Wilson, G. T. (1977). A rose by any other name. Labeling bias and attitudes toward behavior modification. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 45, 184–191.
42.
Yell, M. L., Deno, S. L., & Marston, D. B. (1992). Barriers to implementing curriculum-based measurement. Diagnostique, 18, 99–114.
43.
Zigmond, N., & Miller, S. E. (1986). Assessment for instructional planning. Exceptional Children, 52, 501–509.
