Do Curriculum-Based Measures Predict Performance on Word-Problem-Solving Measures?

Abstract

This study examined whether curriculum-based measures (CBMs) of math word-problem contributed unique variance in predictions of performance on high-stakes tests, beyond the contribution of calculation and reading skills. CBMs were administered to a representative sample of 142 third-grade students at three time points. Results indicate that problem-solving CBMs uniquely predicted a problem-solving composite measure and the California Standardized and Reporting test, and were able to discriminate students at risk and not at risk for math difficulties. Implications for practice are discussed.

Keywords

curriculum-based assessment diagnostic/analytic math

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Andersson

(2007). The contribution of working memory to children’s mathematical word problem solving. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 1201–1216. doi:10.1002/acp.1317

Bennett

R. E.

(2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18, 5–25. doi:10.1080/0969594X.2010.513678

Brown

V. L.

Hammill

Weiderholt

(1995). Test of Reading Comprehension. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

Bryk

A. S.

Raudenbush

S. W.

(2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. London, England: SAGE.

California Department of Education. (2009). Standardized testing and reporting (STAR). Available from http://starsamplequestions.org/

Christ

T. J.

(2006). Short-term estimates of growth using curriculum-based measurement of oral reading fluency: Estimating standard error of the slope to construct confidence intervals. School Psychology Review, 35, 128–133.

Clarke

Nese

J. F. T.

Alonzo

Smith

J. L. M.

Tindal

Kame’enui

E. J.

Baker

S. K.

(2011). Classification accuracy of easy CBM first-grade mathematics measures: Findings and implications for the field. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 36, 243–255. doi:10.1177/1534508411414153

Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2014). Grade 3. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/Math/Content/3

Compton

D. L.

Fuchs

L. S.

Bouton

Gilbert

J. K.

Barquero

L. A.

. . . Crouch

R. C.

(2010). Selecting at-risk first grade readers for early intervention: Eliminating false positives and exploring the promise of a two-stage gated screening process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 327–340. doi:10.1037/a0018448

10.

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, 394–409. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.2.394

11.

Connolly

A. J.

(1998). KeyMath (revised/normative update). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance.

12.

CTB/McGraw-Hill. (1989). Comprehensive tests of basic skills (4th ed.). Monterey, CA: Author.

13.

CTB/McGraw-Hill. (2001). TerraNova. Monterey, CA: Author.

14.

Deno

S. L.

Reschly

A. L.

Lembke

E. S.

Magnusson

Callender

S. A.

Windram

Stachel

(2009). Developing a school-wide progress-monitoring system. Psychology in the Schools, 46, 44–55. doi:10.1002/pits.20353

15.

Foegen

Jiban

Deno

(2007). Progress monitoring measures in mathematics: A review of the literature. The Journal of Special Education, 41, 121–139. doi:10.1177/00224669070410020101

16.

Foegen

Olson

J. R.

Impecoven-Lind

(2008). Developing progress monitoring measures for secondary mathematics: An illustration in algebra. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 33, 240–249. doi:10.1177/1534508407313489

17.

Fuchs

L. S.

(2004). The past, present, and future of curriculum-based measurement research. School Psychology Review, 33, 188–192.

18.

Fuchs

L. S.

Compton

D. L.

Fuchs

Hollenbeck

C. L.

Hamlett

C. L.

Seethaler

P. M.

(2011). Two-stage screening for math problem-solving difficulty using dynamic assessment of algebraic learning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 372–380. doi:10.1177/0022219411407867

19.

Fuchs

L. S.

Compton

D. L.

Fuchs

Powell

S. R.

Schumacher

R. F.

Hamlett

C. L.

. . . Vukovic

R. K.

(2012). Contributions of domain-general cognitive resources and different forms of arithmetic development to pre-algebraic knowledge. Developmental Psychology, 48, 1315-1326. doi:10.1037/a0027475

20.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

Compton

D. L.

Powell

S. R.

Seethaler

P. M.

Capizzi

A. M.

. . . Fletcher

J. M.

(2006). The cognitive correlates of third-grade skill in arithmetic, algorithmic computation, and arithmetic word problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 29–43. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.29

21.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

Courey

S. J.

(2005). Curriculum-based measurement of mathematics competence: From computation to concepts and applications to real-life problem solving. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 30(2), 33–46. doi:10.1177/073724770503000204

22.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

Hamlett

C. L.

Stecker

P. M.

(1990). The role of skills analysis in curriculum-based measurement in math. School Psychology Review, 19, 6–22.

23.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

Hamlett

C. L.

Thompson

Roberts

P. H.

Kubek

Stecker

P. M.

(1994). Technical features of a mathematics concepts and applications curriculum-based measurement system. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 19(4), 23–49. doi:10.1177/073724779401900403

24.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

Karns

Hamlett

C. L.

Katzaroff

(1999). Mathematics performance assessment in the classroom: Effects on teacher planning and student problem solving. American Educational Research Journal, 36, 609–646. doi:10.3102/00028312036003609

25.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

Prentice

(2004). Responsiveness to mathematical problem-solving instruction: Comparing students at risk of mathematics disability with and without risk of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 293–306. doi:10.1177/00222194040370040201

26.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

Prentice

Burch

Hamlett

C. L.

Owen

. . . Jancek

(2003). Explicitly teaching for transfer: Effects on third-grade students’ mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 293–305. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.293

27.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

Prentice

Hamlett

C. L.

Finelli

Courey

S. J.

(2004). Enhancing mathematical problem solving among third-grade students with schema-based instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 635–647. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.4.635

28.

Fuchs

L. S.

Hamlett

C. L.

Fuchs

(1998). Monitoring basic skills progress: Basic math computation (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

29.

Gersten

Beckmann

Clarke

Foegen

Marsh

Star

J. R.

Witzel

(2009). Assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to intervention (RtI) for elementary and middle schools. (Practice Guide Report: NCEE 2009-4060). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

30.

Gersten

Chard

D. J.

Jayanthi

Baker

S. K.

Morphy

Flojo

(2009). Mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of instructional components. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1202–1242. doi:10.3102/0034654309334431

31.

Grimm

K. J.

(2008). Longitudinal associations between reading and mathematics achievement. Developmental Neuropsychology, 33, 410–426. doi:10.1080/87565640801982486

32.

Harcourt Brace & Company. (1996). Stanford Achievement Test (9th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

33.

Hosp

M. K.

Hosp

J. L.

Howell

K. W.

(2007). The ABC’s of CBM: A practical guide to curriculum-based measurement. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

34.

Hresko

Schlieve

P. L.

Herron

S. R.

Swain

Sherbenou

(2003). Comprehensive Math Abilities Test. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

35.

Jitendra

A. K.

Griffin

C. C.

McGoey

Gardill

M. G.

Bhat

Riley

(1998). Effects of mathematical word problem solving by students at risk or with mild disabilities. The Journal of Educational Research, 91, 345–355. doi:10.1080/00220679809597564

36.

Jitendra

A. K.

Sczesniak

Deatline-Buchman

(2005). An exploratory validation of curriculum-based mathematical word problem solving tasks as indicators of mathematics proficiency for third graders. School Psychology Review, 34, 358–371.

37.

Kelley

Hosp

J. L.

Howell

K. W.

(2008). Curriculum-based evaluation and math: An overview. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 33, 250–256. doi:10.1177/1534508407313490

38.

Leh

J. M.

Jitendra

A. K.

Caskie

G. I. L.

Griffin

C. C.

(2007). An evaluation of curriculum-based measurement of mathematics word problem-solving measures for monitoring third-grade students’ mathematics competence. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32, 90–99. doi:10.1177/15345084070320020601

39.

Lembke

Foegen

(2009). Identifying early numeracy indicators for kindergarten and first-grade students. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24, 12–20. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2008.01273.x

40.

Mossman

(2013). Evaluating risk assessments using receiver operating characteristic analysis: Rationale, advantages, insights, and limitations. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 31, 23–39. doi:10.1002/bsl.2050

41.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). The nation’s report card: Mathematics 2011 (NCES 2012-458). Washington, DC: Institute of Educational Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

42.

National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

43.

Pepe

Longton

Janes

(2009). Estimation and comparison of receiver operating characteristic curves. Stata Journal, 9, 1–12.

44.

Psychological Corporation. (1992). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test. San Antonio TX: Harcourt Brace.

45.

Riverside. (1995). Performance assessment of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills. Chicago, IL: Author.

46.

Salvia

Ysseldyke

J. E.

Bolt

(2007). Assessment in special and inclusive education (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

47.

SAS Institute Inc. (2008). SAS/STAT user’s guide. Cary, NC: Author.

48.

Shapiro

E. S.

Edwards

Zigmond

(2005). Progress monitoring of mathematics among students with learning disabilities. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 30(2), 15–32. doi:10.1177/073724770503000203

49.

Shinn

M. R.

Good

R. H.

Stein

(1989). Summarizing trend in student achievement: A comparison of methods. School Psychology Review, 18, 356–370.

50.

Siegler

R. S.

Opfer

(2003). The development of numerical estimation: Evidence for multiple representation of numerical quantity. Psychological Science, 14, 237–243. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.02438

51.

Swanson

H. L.

Beebe-Frankenberger

(2004). The relationship between working memory and mathematical problem solving in children at risk and not at risk for serious math difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 471–491. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.471

52.

Vilenius-Tuohimaa

P. M.

Aunola

Nurmi

J.-E.

(2008). The association between mathematical word problems and reading comprehension. Educational Psychology, 28, 409–426. doi:10.1080/01443410701708228

53.

Wilburne

J. M.

(2006). Preparing preservice elementary school teachers to teach problem solving. Teaching Children Mathematics, 12, 454–463.

54.

Xin

Y. P.

Jitendra

A. K.

Deatline-Buchman

(2005). Effects of mathematical word- problem-solving instruction on middle school students with learning problems. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 181–192. doi:10.1177/00224669050390030501