Effective teaching strategies are not new and are used by all teachers to some degree. Effective teachers, however, have been found to use these strategies in a systematic and regular way. Systematic and successful application of teaching strategies requires the use of performance data to guide teaching decisions. Computer application of Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM) is presented as one methodology capable of providing the necessary link between student performance and instructional decision making. A case study in math is presented to show how CBM with computerized feedback systems can be used to systematically implement effective teaching strategies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BerlinerD.C. (1982). '82 Issue: Should teachers be expected to learn and use direct instruction?A.S.C. Update D., 24, 5.
2.
BerlinerD.C. (1984). The half-full glass: A review of research on teaching. In HosfordP.L. (Ed.), Using what we know about teaching (pp. 51–77). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
3.
BickelW.E., & BickelD.D. (1986). Effective schools, classroom, and instruction: Implications for special education. Exceptional Children, 52, 489–500.
4.
BlankenshipC.S. (1985). Using curriculum-based assessment data to make instructional decisions. Exceptional Children, 52,233-238.
5.
BrophyJ. (1983). Classroom organization and management. Elementary School Journal, 83, 265–286.
6.
BrophyJ. (1980). Recent research on teaching.East Lansing, MI: Institute for Research on Teaching, Michigan State University.
7.
BrownA.L., & CampioneJ.C. (1986). Psychological theory and the study of learning disabilities. American Psychologist, 14, 1059–1068.
DenoS.L. (1986). Formative evaluation of individual student programs: A new role for school psychologists. School Psychology Review, 15, 358–382.
10.
EnglertC.S. (1984). Effective direct instruction practices in special education setting. Remedial and Special Education, 5 (2), 38–47.
11.
FuchsL.S. (1986). Monitoring progress among mildly handicapped pupils: Review of current practice and research. Remedial and Special Education, 7 (5), 5–12.
12.
FuchsL.S. (1990). Math Outcomes for Successful Transitions: Project MOST. Grant application submitted to U.S. Department of Education.
13.
FuchsL.S., & DenoS.L. (in press). Paradigmatic distinctions between instructionally-relevant measurement models. Exceptional Children.
14.
FuchsL.S.DenoS.L., & MirkinP.K. (1982). The effect of continuous evaluation of student goals on teacher decisions (Research Report No. 97).Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
15.
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.
16.
FuchsL.S., & FuchsD. (1984). Criterion-referenced assessment without measurement: How accurate for special education?Remedial and Special Education, 5 (4), 29–32.
17.
FuchsL.S., & FuchsD. (1986). Effects of systematic formative evaluation: A meta-analysis. Exceptional Children, 53, 199–208.
18.
FuchsL.S., & FuchsD. (1988). Curriculum-based measurement: A methodology for evaluating and improving student programs. Diagnostique, 14, 3–13.
19.
FuchsL.S.FuchsD., & HamlettC.L. (1989). Computers and curriculum-based measurement: Effects of teacher feedback systems. School Psychology Review, 18, 260–283.
20.
FuchsL.S.FuchsD.HamlettC.L., & AllinderR. (in press). The contribution of skills analysis to curriculum-based measurement in spelling. Exceptional Children.
21.
FuchsL.S.FuchsD.HamlettC.L., & HasselbringT.S. (1987). Using computers with curriculum-based monitoring: Effects on teacher efficiency and satisfaction. Journal of Special Education Technology, 8 (4), 14–27.
22.
FuchsL.S.FuchsD.HamlettC.L., & SteckerP.M. (1990a). Effects of instructional consultation and curriculum-based measurement on instructional planning and student achievement. Manuscript submitted for publication.
23.
FuchsL.S.FuchsD.HamlettC.L., & SteckerP.M. (1990b). The contribution of skills analysis to curriculum-based measurement in math. School Psychology Review, 19, 6–22.
24.
FuchsL.S.FuchsD., & SteckerP.M. (1989). Effects of curriculum-based measurement of teachers' instructional planning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 51–59.
FuchsL.S.HamlettC.L.FuchsD.SteckerP.M., & FergusonC. (1988). Conducting curriculum-based measurement with computerized data collection: Effects on efficiency and teacher satisfaction. Journal of Special Education Technology, 9 (2), 73–86.
27.
GoodT.L., & GrouwsD.A. (1979). The Missouri mathematics effectiveness project. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 355–362.
HowellK.W. (1986). Direct assessment of academic performance. School Psychology Review, 15, 324–335.
31.
JohnsonG.GerstenR., & CarnineD. (1987). Effects of instructional design variables on vocabulary acquisition of LD students: A study of computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 206–213.
32.
KulikJ.A., & KulikC.C. (1979). College teaching. In PetersonP.L.& WalbergH.J. (Eds.), Research on teaching: Concepts, findings, and implications (pp. 70–93). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
33.
SteinL.E.C., & GoldmannJ. (1980). Beginning reading instruction for children with minimal brain dysfunction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 13, 219–222.
34.
LeinhardtG.ZigmondN., & CooleyW.W. (1981). Reading instruction and its effects. American Educational Research Journal, 18, 343–362.
35.
MarstonD., & MagnussonD. (1988). Curriculum-based measurement: District level implementation. In CradenJ.L.ZinsJ.E.& CurtisM.J. (Eds.), Alternative education delivery systems: Enhancing instructional options for all students (pp. 137–172). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
36.
RosenshineB.V. (1987). Explicit teaching. In BerlinerD.C.& RosenshineB.V. (Eds.), Talks to Teachers: A Festschrift for N.L. Gage (pp. 75–92). New York: Random House.
37.
RosenshineB.V., & StevensR. (1986). Teaching functions. In WittrockM.C. (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 376–391). New York: Macmillan.
TindalG.FuchsL.ChristensonS.MirkinP., & DenoS. (1981). The relationship between student achievement and teacher assessment of short- or long-term goals. (Research Report No. 61).Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
40.
WessonC.KingR.P., & DenoS.L. (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.
41.
YsseldykeJ.E., & ChristensonS.L. (1988). Linking assessment to intervention. In CradenJ.L.ZinsJ.E.& CurtisM.J. (Eds.), Alternative education delivery systems: Enhancing instructional options for all students (pp. 91–109). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
