Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Research indicates the potential for curriculum-based measurement (CBM) to help special educators design more effective instructional programs and effect better student achievement. Nevertheless, few studies have investigated the capacity of general educators to employ this methodology to similar outcomes within regular education settings. One possible explanation for the absence of experimental efficacy trials within general education is that the individual student decision-making focus of CBM requires teachers to make different instructional changes for different students at different times; this can be logistically difficult with large numbers of students. Over the past 3 years, we have addressed this problem by developing innovative CBM decision-making strategies that focus on the class rather than on individuals. In this article, we describe these CBM decision-making strategies in the area of mathematics operations and summarize a series of studies exploring the efficacy of these methods within general education. Directions for additional research and development also are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bishop, N., Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Hamlett, C.L. (1992). Combining curriculum-based measurement and classwide peer tutoring to help general educators provide adaptive instruction. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Christenson, S.L. , Ysseldyke, J.E. , & Thurlow, M.E. (1989). Critical instructional factors for students with mild handicaps: An integrative review. Remedial and Special Education, 10 (5), 21–31.

Corno, L. , & Snow, R.E. (1986). Adapting teaching to individual differences among learners. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Third handbook of research on teaching (pp. 605–629). New York: Macmillan.

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

Fuchs, D. , Fuchs, L.S. , Fernstrom, P.J. (in press). A conservative approach to special education reform: Mainstreaming through transenvironmental programming and curriculum-based measurement. American Educational Research Journal.

Fuchs, L.S. , & Deno, S.L. (1991). Paradigmatic distinctions between instructionally relevant measurement models. Exceptional Children, 57, 488–501.

Fuchs, L.S. , Deno, S.L. , & Mirkin, P.K. (1984). The effects of frequent curriculum-based measurement and evaluation on pedagogy, student achievement, and student awareness of learning. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 449–460.

Fuchs, L.S. , Fuchs, D. , Hamlett, C.L. , & Allinder, R.M. (1991). Effects of expert system advice within curriculum-based measurement on teachers planning and student achievement in spelling. School Psychology Review, 20, 49–66.

Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., Bishop, N., & Bentz, J. (1992). Merging promising practices: Effects of curriculum-based measurement and peer tutoring on teacher planning and student achievement. Manuscript submitted for publication.

10.

Fuchs, L.S. , Fuchs, D. , Hamlett, C.L. , & Stecker, P.M. (1991). Effects of curriculum-based measurement and consultation on teacher planning and student achievement in mathematics operations. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 617–641.

11.

Gersten, R. , Carnine, D. , & Woodward, J. (1987). Direct instruction research: The third decade. Remedial and Special Education, 8 (6), 48–56.

12.

Graden, J.L. , Zins, J.E. , & Curtis, M.J. (1989). Alternative educational delivery systems: Enhancing instructional options for all children. Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists

13.

Jenkins, J.R. , Jewell, M. , Leceister, N. , Jenkins, L. , & Troutner, N. (1990). Development of a school building model for education of handicapped and at risk students in general education classrooms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.

14.

Jones, E.D. , & Krouse, J.P. (1988). The effectiveness of data-based instruction by student teachers in classrooms for pupils with mild handicaps. Teacher Education and Special Education, 11 (1), 9–19.

15.

Leinhardt, G. , Bickel, W. , & Pallay, A. (1982). Unlabeled but still entitled: Toward more effective remediation. Teachers College Record, 84, 391–422.

16.

Marston, D.B. (1989). A curriculum-based measurement approach to assessing academic performance: What is it and why do it. In M.R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 18–78). New York: Guilford.

17.

Pallas, A.M. , Natriello, G. , & McDill, E.L. (1989). The changing nature of disadvantaged population: Current dimensions and future trends. Educational Researcher, 18 (5), 16–22.

18.

Reisberg, L. , & Wolf, R. (1988). Instructional strategies for special education consultants. Remedial and Special Education, 9 (6), 29–40.

19.

Wesson, C.L. (1991). Curriculum-based measurement and two models of follow-up consultation. Exceptional Children, 57, 246–257.

20.

Will, M. (1986). Educating children with learning problems: A shared responsibility. Exceptional Children, 52, 411–415.

21.

Zigmond, N. , & Miller, S.E. (1986). Assessment for instructional planning. Exceptional Children, 52, 501–509.

Classwide Decision-Making Strategies with Curriculum-Based Measurement

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References