This article presents a system for incorporating CBM with portfolios to document the full range of learning opportunities in the classroom. Because of several important similarities between CBM and portfolios, student performance information can be very effectively organized and reported to parents and other teachers. While portfolios are student-driven and varied across different instructional programs, CBM is standardized and consistently interpretable. As a consequence, portfolios are useful in instructional planning and CBM is most useful in evaluating instructional plans: Neither is sufficient without the other. Specific steps are presented for combining these two forms of assessment and then a case is presented as an illustration of this combination. Finally, a research agenda is described.
Deno, S.L. (1986). Formative evaluation of individual student programs: A new role for school psychologists. School Psychology Review, 15, 358–374.
3.
Deno, S.L. (1989). Curriculum-based measurement and alternative special education services: A fundamental and direct relationship. In M.R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 1–17). New York: Guilford.
4.
Deno, S.L., Marston, D., & Mirkin, P. (1982). Valid measurement procedures for continuous evaluation of written expression. Exceptional Children, 483, 68–371.
Fuchs, L.S. (1989). Evaluating solutions: Monitoring progress and revising intervention plans. In M.R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 155–183). New York: Guilford.
7.
Fuchs, L.S., Butterworth, J.R., & Fuchs, D. (1989). Effects of ongoing curriculum-based measurement on student awareness of goals and progress. Education and Treatment of Children, 12 (1), 63–72.
8.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., & Allinder, R.M. (1991). The contribution of skills analysis to curriculum-based measurement in spelling. Exceptional Children, 57 (5), 443–452.
9.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., & Stecker, P.M. (1990). The role of skills analysis in curriculum-based measurement in math. School Psychology Review, 19 (1), 6–22.
Hansen, J. (1992). Literacy portfolios: Helping students know themselves. Educational Leadership, 49 (8), 66–68.
12.
Hebert, E.A. (1992). Portfolios invite reflections—From students and staff. Educational Leadership, 49 (8), 58–61.
13.
Keefe, C.H. (1992). Developing responsive IEPs through holistic assessment. Intervention in School and Clinic, 28 (1), 34–40.
14.
Knight, P. (1992). How I use portfolios in mathematics. Educational Leadership, 49 (8), 71–72.
15.
Lipsky, D.K., & Gartner, A. (1992). Achieving full inclusion: Placing the student at the center of educational reform. In W.C. Stainback & S.B. Stainback (Eds.), Controversial issues confronting special education: Divergent perspectives (pp. 3–12). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
16.
Marston, D. (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: What is it and why do it? In M.R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 18–78). New York: Guilford Press.
17.
Parker, R.I., Tindal, G., & Hasbrouch, J. (1991). Progress monitoring with objective measures of writing performance for students with mild disabilities. Exceptional Children, 58 (1), 61–73.
18.
Shinn, M., & Hubbard, D. (1992). Curriculum based measurement and problem-solving assessment: Basic procedures and outcomes. Focus on Exceptional Children, 24 (5), 1–20.
19.
Simmons, J. (1990). Portfolios as large-scale assessment. Language Arts, 67 (3), 262–268.
20.
Stainback, S., & Stainback, W. (1985). Quantitative and qualitative methodologies: Competitive or complementary? A response to Simpson and Eaves. Exceptional Children, 51 (4), 330–334.
21.
Tindal, G. (1987). Graphing performance. Teaching Exceptional Children, 20, 44–46.
22.
Valencia, S. (1990). A portfolio approach to classroom reading assessment: The whys, whats, and hows. The Reading Teacher, 43 (4), 338–340.
