Reading Curriculum-Based Measures in Spanish

Abstract

Substantial research exists to support the use of reading curriculum-based measures (R-CBMs) for screening and progress monitoring in schools; however, nearly all of this work has been done in English. The changing demographics of students who attend public school includes children who speak other languages. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between R-CBMs in Spanish used as a universal screening measure and performance on the state achievement measure in Spanish. Results included moderate correlations at third and fourth grade. Diagnostic accuracy results using the 25th percentile and the selection of cut scores using receiver operating characteristic curves suggest the utility of R-CBMs in Spanish for screening purposes. Practical implications and future directions for research are discussed.

Keywords

curriculum-based measurement English as second language screening/benchmarking

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baker

S. K.

Cummings

K. D.

Good

R. H.

Smolkowski

(2007). IDEL: Indicadores Dinamicod del Exito in la Lectura: Summary of decision rules for intensive, strategic, and benchmark instructional recommendations in kindergarten through third grade (Tech. Report No. 1). Eugene, OR: Dynamic Measurement Group.

Baker

S. K.

Good

R. H.

(1995). Curriculum-based measurement of English reading with bilingual Hispanic students: A validation study with second-grade students. School Psychology Review, 24, 561–578.

Baker

S. K.

Good

R. H.

Knutson

Watson

(2006). Indicadores dinamicod del exito in la lectura [Dynamic indicators of basic] (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Dynamic Measurement Group.

Baker

S. K.

Plasencia-Peinado

Lezcano-Lytle

(1998). The use of curriculum-based measurement with language-minority students. In Shinn

M. R.

(Ed.), Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement (pp. 175–213). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Bentz

Pavri

(2000). Curriculum-based measurement in assessing bilingual students: A promising new direction. Diagnostique, 25(3), 229–248.

Betts

Reschly

Pickart

Heistad

Sheran

Marston

(2008). An examination of predictive bias for second grade reading outcomes from measures of early literacy skills in kindergarten with respect to English-Language learners and ethnic subgroups. School Psychology Quarterly, 23, 553–570.

Christ

T. J.

Silberglitt

(2007). Estimates of the standard error of measurement for curriculum-based measures of oral reading fluency. School Psychology Review, 36, 130–146.

Compton

D. L.

Fuchs

L. S.

Bryant

J. D.

(2006). Selecting at-risk readers in first grade for early intervention: A two-year longitudinal study of decision rules and procedures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(2), 394–409.

Deno

S. L.

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

10.

Deno

(2003). Developments in curriculum-based measurement. Journal of Special Education, 37, 184–192.

11.

Deno

S. L.

Mirkin

P. K.

Chiang

(1982). Identifying valid measures of reading. Exceptional Children, 49(1), 36–45.

12.

Esparza Brown

J. E.

Sanford

(2011). RTI for English language learners: Appropriately using screening and progress monitoring tools to improve instructional outcomes. Washington, DC: National Center on Response to Intervention.

13.

Fletcher

J. K.

Vaughn

(2009). Response to intervention: Preventing and remediating academic difficulties. Child Development Perspectives, 3, 30–37.

14.

Fry

(2010). Hispanics, high school dropouts and the GED. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center.

15.

Fuchs

L. S.

Deno

S. L.

(2001). Paradigmatic distinctions between instructionally relevant measurement models. Exceptional Children, 57, 488–500.

16.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

(2002). Curriculum-based measurement: Describing competence, enhancing outcomes, evaluating treatment effects, and identifying treatment nonresponders. Peabody Journal of Education, 77, 64–84.

17.

Glover

T. A.

DiPerna

J. C.

(2007). Service delivery for response to intervention: Core components and directions for future research. School Psychology Review, 36(4), 526–540.

18.

Good

R. H.

Simmons

D. C.

Kame’enui

E. J.

(2001). The importance and decision-making utility of a continuum of fluency-based indicators of foundational reading skills for third-grade high-stakes outcomes. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 257–288.

19.

Harcourt Educational Measurement. (2003). Stanford achievement test (10th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.

20.

Hintze

J. M.

Silberglitt

(2005). A longitudinal examination of the diagnostic accuracy and predictive validity of R-CBM and high-stakes testing. School Psychology Review, 34, 372–386.

21.

Hosp

J. L.

Hosp

M. K.

Dole

J. A.

(2011). The predictive validity of universal screening measure across disaggregated subgroups. School Psychology Review, 40, 108–131.

22.

Jenkins

J. R.

Hudson

R. F.

Johnson

E. S.

(2007). Screening for at-risk readers in a response to intervention framework. School Psychology Review, 36, 582–600.

23.

Johnson

E. S.

Jenkins

J. R.

Petscher

Catts

H. W.

(2009). How can we improve the accuracy of screening instruments? Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24, 174–185.

24.

Johnson

E. S.

Jenkins

J. R.

Petscher

(2010). Improving the accuracy of a direct route screening process. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 35, 131–140.

25.

Keller-Margulis

M. A.

Shapiro

E. S.

Hintze

J. M.

(2008). Long term diagnostic accuracy of curriculum-based measures in reading and mathematics. School Psychology Review, 37(3), 374–390.

26.

Marston

D. B.

(1989). A curriculum-based measurement approach to assessing academic performance: What it is and why do it. In Shinn

M. R.

(Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 18–78). New York, NY: Guilford.

27.

Muyskens

Betts

Lau

M. Y.

Marston

(2009). Predictive validity of curriculum-based measures in the reading assessment of students who are English language learners. California School Psychologist, 14, 11–21.

28.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2010). Participation in education: Language minority school-age children. Retrieved from National Center for Education Statistics: http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2010/section1/indicator05.asp

29.

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 et seq.

30.

Passel

J. S.

Cohn

Lopez

(2011). Hispanics account for more than half of nation’s growth in past decade. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center.

31.

Pearson Education, Inc. (2010). AIMSweb. San Antonio: Author.

32.

Ramírez

R. D.

Shapiro

E. S.

(2007). Cross-language relationship between Spanish and English oral reading fluency among Spanish-speaking English language learners in bilingual education classrooms. Psychology in the Schools, 44, 795–806.

33.

Ramírez

R. D.

Shapiro

E. S.

(2006). Curriculum-based measurement and the evaluation of reading skills of Spanish-speaking English language learners in bilingual education classrooms. School Psychology Review, 35, 356–369.

34.

Reschly

A. L.

Busch

T. W.

Betts

Deno

S. L.

Long

(2009). Curriculum-Based Measurement Oral Reading as an indicator of reading achievement: A meta-analysis of the correlational evidence. Journal of School Psychology, 47, 427–469.

35.

Roehrig

A. D.

Petscher

Nettles

S. M.

Hudson

R. F.

Torgesson

J. K.

(2008). Accuracy of the DIBELS oral reading fluency measure for predicting third-grade reading comprehension outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 46, 343–366.

36.

Shapiro

E. S.

(2011). Academic skills problems: Direct assessment and intervention (4th ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.

37.

Shapiro

E. S.

Keller

M. A.

Lutz

J. G.

Santoro

L. E.

Hintze

J. M.

(2006). Curriculum-based measures and performance on state asessment and standardized tests: Reading and math performance in Pennsylvania. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 24, 19-35. doi: 10.1177/073428290528523710.1177/0734282905285237

38.

Shinn

M. M

Shinn

M. R.

(2002). AIMSweb training workbook: Administratin and scoring of reading curriculum-based measurement (R-CBM) for use in general outcome measurement. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.

39.

Stage

S. A.

Jacobsen

M. D.

(2001). Predicting student success on a state-mandated performance-based assessment using oral reading fluency. School Psychology Review, 30, 407–419.

40.

Streiner

D. L.

Cairney

(2007). What’s under the ROC? An introduction to receiver operating characteristics curves. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 52, 121–128.

41.

Swets

J. A.

Dawes

R. M.

Monahan

J. M.

(2000). Psychologicals science can improve diagnostic decisions. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 1, 1–26.

42.

Texas Education Agency. (2010). TAKS resources. Retrieved from Texas Education Agency: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/taks/

43.

VanDerHeyden

A. M.

(2011). Technical adequacy of response to intervention decisions. Exceptional Children, 77, 335–350.

44.

Wanzek

Roberts

Linan-Thompson

Vaughn

Woodruff

A. L.

Murray

C. S.

(2010). Differences in the relationship of oral reading fluency and high-stakes measures of reading comprehension. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 35, 67–77.

45.

Wayman

M. M.

McMaster

K. L.

Saenz

L. M.

Watson

J. A.

(2010). Using curriculum-based measurement to monitor secondary English language learners’ responsiveness to peer-mediated reading instruction. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 26, 308–332.

46.

Wayman

M. M.

Wallace

Wiley

H. I.

Ticha

Espin

C. A.

(2007). Literature synthesis on curriculum-based measurement in reading. Journal of Special Education, 41, 85–120.

47.

Wiley

H. I.

Deno

S. L.

(2005). Oral reading and maze measures as predictors of success for English learners on a state standards assessment. Remedial and Special Education, 26(4), 207–214.

48.

Woodcock

R. W.

Munoz-Sandoval

A. F.

(1996). Bateria Woodcock-Munoz: Pruebas de aprovechiamento–Revisada. Itasca, IL: Riverside.