Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This paper presents four studies that examine the time required to implement direct and frequent curriculum-based measurement (CBM) as well as strategies to improve the efficiency of CBM. Ten rural special education resource teachers were the subjects. The dependent data for all studies are the total amount of time required for CBM, including teacher preparation time, direction of students, and scoring and graphing. Teacher satisfaction with the various treatment conditions is also described. Study 1 compares the time required for CBM in initial training sessions and in subsequent classroom use. Studies 2 and 3 employ a single-subject design with the same baseline and treatment phases across 10 subjects. The independent variables are a specified order of administration of the CBM tasks (Study 2) and the establishment of a daily schedule of measurement (Study 3). Study 4 also employs a single case study methodology, reversal to baseline, but with teacher-selected independent variables including use of aides and machinery to administer CBM tasks, and group administration of the tasks. The independent variables proved to have varying effects on teacher efficiency. Implications for teaching practices are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Deno, S.L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative . Exceptional Children, 52, 219-232.

Deno, S.L. , Marston, D. , & Mirkin, P. (1982). Valid measurement procedures for continuous evaluation of written expression. Exceptional Children, 48, 368-376.

Deno, S.L. , Marston, D. , Shinn, M. , & Tindal, G. (1983). Oral reading fluency: A sim le datum for scaling reading disability. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities , 2(4), 53-59.

Deno, S.L. , Mirkin, P.K. , & Chiang, B. (1982). Identifying valid measures of reading. Exceptional Children, 49, 36-45.

Deno, S. , Mirkin, P. , Lowry, L. , & Kuehnle, K. (1980). Relationships among simple measures of spelling and performance on standardized achievement tests (Research Rep. No. 21). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 197 508)

Deno, S.L. , Mirkin, P.K. , & Wesson, C. (1984). Procedures for writing data-based IEPs. Teaching Exceptional Children, 16, 94-104.

Fuchs, L. , 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.

Fuchs. L.S. , Wesson, C. , Tindal, G. , Mirkin, P.K. , & Deno, S.L. (1981). Teacher efficiency in continuous evaluation of IEP goals (Research Rep. No. 53). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities .

Germann, G. , & Tindal, G. (1985). An application of curriculum-based assessment: The use of direct and repeated measurement. Exceptional Children , 52, 244-265.

10.

Haring, N. , & Krug, D.A. (1975). Placement in regular programs: Procedures and results. Exceptional Children, 41, 413-417.

11.

Haring, N. , Maddux, L. , & Krug, D.A. (1972). Investigation of systematic instructional procedures to facilitate academic achievement in mentally retarded disadvantaged children . Seattle: University of Washington, Experimental Education Unit, Final Report.

12.

Harris, A.J. , & Jacobson, M.D. (1972). Basic elementary reading vocabularies-The first R series. New York: Macmillan.

13.

Jenkins, J.R. , Deno, S.L. , & Mirkin, P.K. (1979). Measuring pupil progress toward the least restrictive alternative. Learning Disability Quarterly, 2, 81-91.

14.

Jenkins, J.R. , Mayhall, W. , Peschka, C. , & Townsend, V. (1974). Using direct and daily measures to increase learning . Journal of Learning Disabilities, 10, 604-608.

15.

Lovitt, T. (1977). In spite of my resistance, l've learned from children . Columbus, OH: Merrill.

16.

Marston, D. , & Magnusson, D. (1985). Implementing curriculum-based measurement in special and regular education settings. Exceptional Children, 52, 266-276.

17.

M irkin, P.K. , Deno, S.L. , Tindal, G. , & Kuehnle, K. (1979). Formative evaluation: Continued development of data utilization systems (Research Rep. No. 23). Minneapolis : University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.

18.

Mirkin, P.K. , Fuchs, L.S. , Tindal, G. , Christenson, S. , & Deno, S.L. , (1981). The effect of IEP monitoring strategies on teacher behavior (Research Rep. No. 62). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities .

19.

Tyler, R.W. , & White, S.H. (1980). Testing, teaching, and learning: Report of a conference on research on testing. Washington, DC: Department of Health, Education and Welfare/National Institute of Education.

20.

Wesson, C. , King, R. , & Deno, S. (1984). Direct and frequent measurement: If it's so good for us, why don't we use it? Learning Disability Quarterly ,7(1), 45-48.

21.

White, O.R. , & Haring, N. (1980). Exceptional teaching (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Facilitating the Efficiency of On-Going Curriculum-Based Measurement

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References