Recently, researchers and practitioners alike have expressed concern over the use of standardized testing in special and regular education. One promising alternative is curriculum-based assessment, a method of measuring student achievement in terms of the curriculum of the local school. This article describes a schoolwide curriculum-based system of identifying and programming for students with learning disabilities. The system consists of three parts: academic skill probes, work habits observation, and an inventory of the classroom environment. The development and use of these measures for students with learning disabilities and their teachers are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdelmanH.S., & TaylorL. (1986). An introduction to learning disabilities.Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
2.
AndersonL.M.EvertsonC.M., & BrophyJ.F. (1979). An experimental study of effective teaching in first grade reading groups. The Elementary School Journal, 79, 193-223.
3.
BlankenshipC. & LillyM.S. (1981). Mainstreaming students with learning and behavior problems: Techniques for the classroom teacher.New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
4.
BursuckW.D., & LessenE. L (1985). Curriculum-based assessment: Increasing the participation of regular educators in mainstreaming. ICEC Quarterly, 34, 25–26.
DenoS.L., & FuchsL.S. (1987). Developing curriculumbased measurement systems for data based special education problem solving. Focus on Exceptional Children, 79 (8), 1–16.
7.
DenoS.L., & MirkinP.K. (1977). Data-based program modification: A manual.Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
8.
DenoS.MirkinRLawryL., & KuehnleK. (1980). Relationship among simple measures of spelling and performance on standardized achievement tests (Res. Ref. No. 21).Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Institute for Research.
9.
EatonM.D., & LovittT.C. (1972). Achievement data vs. direct and daily measurement. In SembG. (Ed.), Behavior analysis and education.Lawrence: University of Kansas.
10.
EpsteinM.H., & CullinanD. (1980). An educational application of the social comparison method. Child Behavior Therapy, 2, 69–71.
11.
FuchsL.S.DenoS., & MarstonD. (1983). Improving the reliability of curriculum-based measures of academic skills for psychoeducational decision making. Diagnostique, 8, 135–149.
12.
FuchsL.S., & FuchsD. (1986). Curriculum-based assessment of progress toward long-term and short-term goals. Journal of Special Education, 20, 69–82.
13.
GicklingE.F., & ThompsonV. R (1986). A personal view of curriculum-based assessment. Exceptional Children, 52, 205–218.
14.
GoodT., & BrophyJ. (1978). Looking in classrooms (2nd ed.). New York: Harper and Row.
15.
GradenJ.L.CaseyA., & BonstromD. (1985). Implementing a prereferral intervention system: Part II. The data. Exceptional Children, 51, 487–496.
HowellK.W.KaplanJ.S., & O'ConnellC.Y. (1979). Evaluating exceptional children: A task analysis approach.Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
18.
JenkinsJ.DenoS., & MirkinP. (1979). Measuring pupil progress toward the least restrictive alternative. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 2, 81–91.
19.
JenkinsJ., & PanyD. (1978). Standardized achievement tests: How useful for special education?Exceptional Children, 44, 448–453.
20.
LessenE., & SummersM.E. (1985). Lessen's lessons: A resource manual for teaching high incidence handicapped learners (3rd ed.). Dekalb: Northern Illinois University
21.
LillyM.S. (1979). Children with exceptional needs: A survey of special education.New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
22.
LillyM.S. (1986). The relationship between general and special education: A new face on an old issue. Counterpoint, 6 (1), 10.
23.
MarstonD.DenoS.L., &TindalG. (1983). A comparison of standardized achievement techniques and direct measurement techniques in measuring pupil progress (Res. Rep. 126). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
24.
MarstonD.MirkinP., & DenoS. (1984). Curriculumbased measurement: An alternative to traditional screening, referral and identification. Journal of Special Education, 18, 109–117.
25.
MarstonD.TindalG., & DenoS. (1984). Eligibility for learning disability services: A direct and repeated measurement approach. Exceptional Children, 50, 554-556.
YsseldykeJ.E. (1983). Current practices in making psychoeducational decisions about learning disabled students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16, 226–233.
33.
YsseldykeJ.E.AlgozzineB.RicheyL., & GradenJ. (1982). Declaring students eligible for learning disability services: Why bother with data?Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 37–41.
