The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of goal line feedback within Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM) in math. Twenty special educators implemented CBM for 20 weeks with two chronically low-achieving pupils in math, who had been identified as learning disabled. One student was assigned randomly to a feedback condition without goal lines superimposed on graphs; the other student, to a feedback condition including goal lines on graphs. Analyses of variance indicated that the level and slope of student performance was comparable across treatment conditions. Goal line feedback was, however, associated with reliably and dramatically greater performance stability. Implications are discussed in terms of facilitating measurement accuracy and understanding how effects of goals are mediated among students with learning disabilities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlbertoP. A., & TroutmanA. C. (1986). Applied behavior analysis for teachers (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
2.
BavelasJ. B., & LeeE. S. (1978). Effects of goal level in performance: A trade-off of quantity and quality. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 32, 219–240.
3.
BryanT. H., & BryanJ. H. (1981). Some personal and social experiences with learning disabled children. Advances in Special Education, 3, 147–186.
4.
CampbellD. J., & IlgenD. R. (1976). Additive effects of task difficulty and goal setting on subsequent task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 319–324.
5.
DenoS. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219–232.
6.
DenoS. L. (1986). Formative evaluation of individual student programs: A new role for school psychologists. School Psychology Review, 15, 358–382.
7.
FrumessS. C. (1973). A comparison of management groups involving the use of the standard behavior chart and setting performance aims. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Houston.
8.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S., & Deno. S. L. (1985). Performance instability: An identifying characteristic of learning disabled children?Learning Disability Quarterly, 8.19–26.
9.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.TindalG., & DenoS. L. (1986). Performance instability of learning disabled, emotionally handicapped, and nonhandicapped children. Learning Disability Quarterly, 9, 84–88.
10.
FuchsL. S. (1988). Modified Accuracy of Implementation Rating Scale—Math. Unpublished instrument.
11.
FuchsL. S.BahrC.,& RiethH. (1989). Effects of goal structures and performance contingencies on the math performance of adolescents with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22.554–560.
12.
FuchsL. S., & DenoS. L. (in press). Paradigmatic distinctions between instructionally relevant measurement models. Exceptional Children.
13.
FuchsL. S.DenoS. L., & MirkinP. K. (1984). 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.
FuchsL. S., & FuchsD. (1986). Curriculum-based assessment of progress toward long- and short-term goals. The Journal of Special Education, 20, 69–82.
15.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD., & HamlettC. L. (1989). Effects of instrumental use of curriculum-based measurement to enhance instructional programs. Remedial and Special Education, 10 (2), 21–32.
16.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.HamlettC. L., & AllinderR. M. (1989). The reliability and validity of skills analysis programs within curriculum-based measurement. Diagnostique, 14, 203–221.
17.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.HamlettC. L., & SteckerP. M. (1990). The role of skills analysis in curriculum-based measurement in math. School Psychology Review. 19.6–22.
GcrmannG., & TindalG. (1985). An application of curriculumbased assessment: The use of direct and repeated measurements. Exceptional Children, 52, 244–256.
20.
GibsonS., & DemboM. H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 569–582.
21.
HamlettC. L. (1987). Introduction to the computer: A tutorial. [Unpublished computer program.]
JenkinsJ. R.May hallW.PeshkaC., & TownsendV. (1974). Using direct and daily measures to increase learning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 10, 604–608. o
24.
LaPorteR. E., & NathR. (1976). Role of performance goals in prose learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 260–264.
25.
LockeE. A.ShawK. N.SaariL. M., & LathamG. P. (1981). Goal setting and task performance: 1969-1980. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 125–152.
26.
MarstonD. (1987-1988). The effectiveness of special education: A time-series analysis of reading performance in regular and special education settings. The Journal of Special Education, 21 (4), 13–26.
27.
MarstonD. (1989). A curriculum-based measurement approach to assessing academic performance: What it is and why do it. In ShinnM. R. (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 18–78). New York: Guilford.
28.
Office of the Federal Register (1986). Code of federal regulations, Parts .300–399Washington, DC: Author.
29.
PalmerD. J.DrummondF.TollisonP., & ZinkgraffS. (1982). An attributional investigation of performance outcomes for learning disabled and normal-achieving pupils. The Journal of Special Education, 16, 207–219.
30.
SalviaJ., & YsseldykeJ. E. (1989). Assessment in special and remedial education.Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
31.
SchunkD. H. (1985). Participation in goal setting: Effects on selfefficacy and skills of learning disabled children. The Journal of Special Education, 19, 307–317.
32.
ShinnM. R. (Ed.). (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children.New York: Guilford.
33.
ShinnM. R.TindalG., & SteinS. (1988). Curriculum-based measurement and the identification of mildly handicapped students: A research review. Professional School Psychology, 3, 69–86.
34.
SkibaR. J.DenoS. L.MarstonD., & WessonC. (1987). Characteristics of time-series data collected through curriculum-based measurement. Diagnostique, 72 (1), 3–15.
35.
StanleyJ. C. (1971). Reliability. In ThorndikeR. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
TawneyJ. W., & GastD. L. (1984). Single subject research in special education.Columbus, OH: Merrill.
38.
ThompsonR. H.WhiteK. R., & MorganD. P. (1982). Teacherstudent interaction patterns in classrooms with mainstreamed mildly handicapped students. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 220–236.
39.
WessonC.DenoS. L.MirkinP. K.MaruyamaG.SkibaR.KingR., & SevcikB. (1988). A causal analysis of the relationships among ongoing curriculum-based measurement and evaluation, the structure of instruction, and student achievement. The Journal of Special Education, 22, 330–343.
40.
WhiteO. R., & HaringN. G. (1980). Exceptional teaching (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
