What do you think?
Rate this book
Academic Assessment and Intervention
Serving students with academic deficiencies necessitates communication and collaboration among professionals from several disciplines. Academic Assessment and Intervention brings together divergent approaches in order to demonstrate that scientific evidence, rather than biases or previous practice, must determine assessment practices that are selected and used for particular purposes.
Similar to a handbook in its comprehensive topical coverage, this edited collection provides a contextual foundation for academic assessment and intervention; describes both norm-referenced and curriculum-based assessment/measurement in detail; considers the implications of both of these assessments on ethnically diverse populations; provides a clear link between assessment, evidence-based interventions and the RTI model; and considers other important topics related to this area such as teacher behavior. Intended primarily for graduate-level courses in education, school psychology, or child clinical psychology, it will also be of interest to practicing professionals in these fields.
Similar to a handbook in its comprehensive topical coverage, this edited collection provides a contextual foundation for academic assessment and intervention; describes both norm-referenced and curriculum-based assessment/measurement in detail; considers the implications of both of these assessments on ethnically diverse populations; provides a clear link between assessment, evidence-based interventions and the RTI model; and considers other important topics related to this area such as teacher behavior. Intended primarily for graduate-level courses in education, school psychology, or child clinical psychology, it will also be of interest to practicing professionals in these fields.
725 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2014
1 person is currently reading
1 person want to read
About the author
Steven G. Little
4 booksSteven G. Little, PhD, is a Professor of clinical psychology at Walden University. He earned his PhD in school psychology from Tulane University in 1987 and has directed programs at various universities in the United States and New Zealand. Dr Little previously served as president of Division 16 (School Psychology) of APA and has worked on the editorial boards of numerous journals. His main research interest is in behavioral interventions with children in homes and schools. Dr. Little is widely published, and he is also assistant director of the Svarcanas Centre. He lives in Malone, New York.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
December 28, 2014
The outcome of the assessment for instructional placement is a determination of the instructional level of functioning and a decision regarding whether the student’s skills are appropriately matched to the instruction presented in the classroom. The third step of the model is instructional modification. This step is based on the CBA-ID and CBE assessment models, in which direct assessment data are gathered to determine appropriate modifications to instruction to address the student’s needs. The modifications may include general strategies such as behavioral supports as well as academic strategies and instructional modifications specific to areas of academic need. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
fourth step of the Shapiro CBA model involves progress monitoring. This step requires that short- and/or long-term goals be established and the related subskill and CBM (GOM), respectively, be used to measure progress on a frequent, consistent schedule. Successful progress monitoring requires that the measure directly assess the target skill areas being addressed through intervention and that the data are gathered over time and, ideally, graphed for visual inspection of progress. A final and essential feature of the Shapiro CBA model is not a specific step in the process, but instead is the feedback loop that is created between steps 3 and 4. Once instructional modification takes place and progress monitoring is initiated, it is essential for the progress monitoring data to be observed frequently and for data-based decision-making to occur. If the graphed progress monitoring data suggest adequate progress in response to the intervention, then a decision may be made to continue with the instructional modifications in place. If adequate progress is not evident, it may be necessary to return to step 3 of this CBA model and determine whether different or additional instructional modifications may be required. This feedback loop continues in this manner until adequate progress is observed. • Delete this highlight
Summary • Delete this highlight
Add a note
CBA emerged as an alternative to the overuse of PNRT, which were overused and misused in education. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Kaplan wrote the following in his text entitled The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Sciences: “I call it the law of the instrument, and it may be formulated as follows: Give a small boy a hammer, and he will find that everything he encounters needs pounding • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Neither psychometric nor behavioral measures provide a complete set of assessment solutions in education. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
important points are, perhaps, to understand a problem in context so that it may be resolved. Some version of CBA is often the best tool for that purpose; however, there is much development that is necessary to enhance our understanding of CBAs as they are used for assessment and evaluation. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
decisions are best guided with multiple sources of data and, perhaps, with a review of both CBA and PNRT data. Regardless of the source, the interpretation and use of data to guide educational decisions depends on professional judgment. That requires training, reflection, and an understanding of the qualities, assumptions, and intended purposes for each assessment and source of data. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
9 The Use of Technology with Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM) Madi Phillips, Mark R. Shinn, and Ben Ditkowsky • Delete this highlight
Add a note
10 Responsive Assessment and Instruction Practices • Delete this highlight
Add a note
11 Use of CBA/CBM with Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Populations • Delete this highlight
Add a note
success on several assessment tools that purport to measure academic achievement may actually rely heavily on knowledge of American culture or English language proficiency. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Language Development • Delete this highlight
Add a note
reading problems are best perceived as language problems, due to the reciprocal relationship between oral language and reading skills that continues throughout childhood (Fernald • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Students without established English academic language tend to develop significant reading comprehension deficits, even if their decoding skills are sufficiently developed • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Cummin’s linguistic interdependence hypothesis that posits the acquisition of a second language (e.g., English) in part depends on the adequate development of a student’s native language (e.g., Spanish). • Delete this highlight
Add a note
for ELs, it may be important to incorporate measures of English proficiency into the assessment decision-making process, • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Curriculum-Based Measures and CLD Students • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Curriculum-based assessment (CBA) is an approach to providing the information needed to improve instruction that includes either a focus on identifying the specific skills that need to be taught (e.g., Howell & Nolet, 1999), or identifying who is at risk and whether or not the support is reducing that risk (e.g., • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM), emphasizes that the use of assessment techniques are more general in focus, often called general outcome measures (GOM; Shinn, 1998), and concentrate decision-making on “when to change” instruction. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
At tier 1, CBE methods can be used as part of typical instruction to identify methods of differentiation that can help students master the skills taught. CBM tools can be used for screening to identify who needs additional support and could benefit from a tier 2 intervention as well as determine whether the intervention is having the desired effect. There is fairly substantial support that CBM tools can be used with students who are native English speakers (NES) for screening and progress monitoring (Shapiro, 2011). However, as detailed more fully later in this chapter, it is inappropriate to generalize the outcomes from NES to students who are CLD (Vanderwood • Delete this highlight
Add a note
From an assessment perspective, it is important to assess the areas most known to influence academic outcomes. In reading, those areas are the “big five” skills of phonemic awareness, alphabetic principal, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension (National Reading Panel, 2000). • Delete this highlight
Add a note
In mathematics, the targets are less clear than in reading, but do include the skills of computation, problem solving, and algebraic concepts (National Mathematics Advisory Panel, 2008). • Delete this highlight
Add a note
CBM include the use of “standard probes” that can be used across curricula and school districts (e.g., DIBELS, AIMSweb). The standard probe approach provides several advantages, such as the ability to improve the overall psychometric properties of the measures, with the goal of improving the information that is used to help guide the problem-solving process. The standard probe approach is especially useful for discreet skills such as phonemic awareness, phonics, and math computation. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
the challenge with interpreting the data is that most studies combine CLD students, especially ELs, into one group. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Validating CBM Measures with CLD Students • Delete this highlight
Add a note
A major emphasis of the Test Standards is the concept of the “equivalence” of scores when tests are used with groups that vary on some dimension that is known to affect the construct being measured. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
bias is considered to be “construct-irrelevant variance that result in systematically lower or higher scores for identifiable groups of examinees • Delete this highlight
Add a note
bias is not a mean difference between groups. Instead, bias occurs when the test scores obtained on a particular test by different subgroups has a different meaning in relation to other variables. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
In the context of CBM, bias would be considered to be present when scores predict with a different level of accuracy for one group (e.g., English Learners) than for another (e.g., native English speakers) on an important criterion measure (e.g., state test). • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Sensitivity refers to the percentage of students later found to have reading problems who were previously identified as at-risk for later reading problems. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Specificity is similar to sensitivity, but this term indicates the percentage of students later found not to have reading problems who had previously been identified as not at risk • Delete this highlight
Add a note
order to maximize predictive accuracy, sensitivity and specificity are critical for evaluating the quality of cut scores used with CBM tools for screening purposes. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
When CBM tools are used for progress monitoring, it is also important to know whether change over time can be detected by the tests (Shapiro, 2011), so that the results can be used to evaluate the impact of interventions. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Early Literacy CBM and CLD Research • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Table 11.1 Status of CBM Research with CLD Students • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Phonological Awareness. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Baker and Baker (2008) found that the best predictors of early reading in English for EL students were PA, print awareness, and alphabetic knowledge. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
PA is the conscious awareness of the structure of sound in speech. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
DIBELS phonemic segmentation fluency (PSF) task exhibited moderate to strong correlations with elision, blending words, and phonological awareness composite scores on a diagnostic assessment of PA (e.g., Comprehensive Test of Phonological Awareness—CTOPP). This relationship between PA CBM measures and well-established norm-referenced PA measure supports the use of PA CBMs (e.g., DIBELS PSF) as an initial diagnostic tool to inform reading intervention. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
PA is the awareness of sounds in oral language, while phonics is letter-sound correspondence in printed language • Delete this highlight
Add a note
it is appropriate to use phonics CBM measures with EL students when screening. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
recent longitudinal study with ELs by Lesaux and Siegel (2003) indicted phonics skills measured in kindergarten was the best single predictor of word reading and comprehension in second grade. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Fluency CBM and CLD Research • Delete this highlight
Add a note
fluency, which is the accurate and automatic reading of text. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
R-CBM and are also known as ORF (Oral Reading Fluency). • Delete this highlight
Add a note
No bias was found in second and third grade. However, bias was found in fourth and fifth grade. Specifically, ORF overestimated reading comprehension for the Black students and underestimated for the Caucasian students. From this study, grade appears to be a moderator of the presence of ethnicity bias. In • Delete this highlight
Add a note
language proficiency should be considered as a part of assessment and interpretation. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Vocabulary and Comprehension CBM and CLD Research • Delete this highlight
Add a note
There is agreement in the literature that a gap in vocabulary exists between economically disadvantaged and economically advantaged students throughout school, and that vocabulary is crucial in EL students’ success • Delete this highlight
Add a note
only a very limited amount of research has been done in this area connecting measures of vocabulary to critical outcomes measures. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
CBM measures that assess comprehension are commonly called MAZE tasks. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
For the MAZE task, words are deleted from a passage and the student must insert the appropriate word from a choice of words (Rathvon, • Delete this highlight
Add a note
This task is also known as a cloze-procedure assessment. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
DIBELS DAZE, • Delete this highlight
Add a note
MAZE explained additional variance beyond ORF for NES students but not for EL students. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
MAZE becomes more useful as a predictor of future reading performance when students get older and more proficient in English. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
MAZE was found to be able to capture improvement of performance over the year and differences in growth rate. Thus, this study supported the use of the MAZE task as a progress-monitoring tool with NES students. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Mathematics and Written Language CBM and CLD Research • Delete this highlight
Add a note
CBM measures in math are used to measure general math competence (e.g., early numeracy skills, math computation, and math problem solving). Regarding • Delete this highlight
Add a note
This evidence of only low to moderate validity may be due to the low degree of match between the content of math CBMs and standardized tests of math. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Regarding written language CBM, there are various methods that have been explored in the scoring of these measures. The primary scoring methods include examining total words written or correct letter sequences. However, other methods that may be utilized include holistic approaches, use of long words, use of punctuation, words spelled correctly, total punctuation marks, or words in complete sentences. The • Delete this highlight
Add a note
the following methods exhibited the greatest predictive validity for third grade: correct punctuation, total punctuation, and words in correct sequences. However, these validity values are still relatively inadequate, ranging from 0.31 to 0.36. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Overall, the review concluded that there is some evidence supporting the use of written language CBM in screening. However, these measures are inadequate for progress monitoring. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Recommendations and Future Research • Delete this highlight
Add a note
validity is the most fundamental aspect of test evaluation and requires a connection between the evidence collected and the use of the test. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
we targeted using CBMs in early literacy, reading, and math for the purposes of screening and progress monitoring with CLD students in K–12 settings. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
studies reviewed for this chapter were almost exclusively focused on EL students, and primarily Spanish-speaking EL students. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
almost all studies treated the EL group as though they are homogenous and would perform and respond in a similar manner. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
most studies with students who are CLD focused on grades K–6, with almost no evidence provided examining the use of CBMs in high school settings. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
the third challenge is that most of the validity evidence is focused on measures of oral reading fluency and early literacy. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
There is very little validity evidence for using math and written language CBMs with the CLD student population for screening and progress monitoring. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Fourth, the impact of cultural variability is significantly under-examined in the CBM literature, and what is available provides somewhat mixed results (e.g., • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Table 11.2 provides five recommendations that are supported by our review. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
CBM tools can be and should be used with the CLD K–6 student population for screening and progress monitoring. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
because other options with more evidence of validity do not exist, and there is a clear need for early identification and evaluation of interventions for students coming from CLD backgrounds. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
additional sources of data must be used to validate conclusions made based on CBM scores. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
convergent data are absolutely essential and must be routinely used when interpreting CBM scores. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
ELs should not be treated as one homogenous group and, as already stated, it appears there may be a need for cut-scores based on English language proficiency. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
suggesting the use of separate norms created for students at varying levels of English proficiency. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Students who are considered at the beginning stage of acquiring English language proficiency should probably be compared to similar students when attempting to understand how their reading skills compare to their peers. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Progress monitoring research suggests it is appropriate and most likely beneficial to keep expectations high for students who are CLD when they receive interventions and using NES rates of improvement and growth standards should lead to more frequent modifications and improvement of intensive interventions. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Add a note
fourth step of the Shapiro CBA model involves progress monitoring. This step requires that short- and/or long-term goals be established and the related subskill and CBM (GOM), respectively, be used to measure progress on a frequent, consistent schedule. Successful progress monitoring requires that the measure directly assess the target skill areas being addressed through intervention and that the data are gathered over time and, ideally, graphed for visual inspection of progress. A final and essential feature of the Shapiro CBA model is not a specific step in the process, but instead is the feedback loop that is created between steps 3 and 4. Once instructional modification takes place and progress monitoring is initiated, it is essential for the progress monitoring data to be observed frequently and for data-based decision-making to occur. If the graphed progress monitoring data suggest adequate progress in response to the intervention, then a decision may be made to continue with the instructional modifications in place. If adequate progress is not evident, it may be necessary to return to step 3 of this CBA model and determine whether different or additional instructional modifications may be required. This feedback loop continues in this manner until adequate progress is observed. • Delete this highlight
Summary • Delete this highlight
Add a note
CBA emerged as an alternative to the overuse of PNRT, which were overused and misused in education. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Kaplan wrote the following in his text entitled The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Sciences: “I call it the law of the instrument, and it may be formulated as follows: Give a small boy a hammer, and he will find that everything he encounters needs pounding • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Neither psychometric nor behavioral measures provide a complete set of assessment solutions in education. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
important points are, perhaps, to understand a problem in context so that it may be resolved. Some version of CBA is often the best tool for that purpose; however, there is much development that is necessary to enhance our understanding of CBAs as they are used for assessment and evaluation. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
decisions are best guided with multiple sources of data and, perhaps, with a review of both CBA and PNRT data. Regardless of the source, the interpretation and use of data to guide educational decisions depends on professional judgment. That requires training, reflection, and an understanding of the qualities, assumptions, and intended purposes for each assessment and source of data. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
9 The Use of Technology with Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM) Madi Phillips, Mark R. Shinn, and Ben Ditkowsky • Delete this highlight
Add a note
10 Responsive Assessment and Instruction Practices • Delete this highlight
Add a note
11 Use of CBA/CBM with Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Populations • Delete this highlight
Add a note
success on several assessment tools that purport to measure academic achievement may actually rely heavily on knowledge of American culture or English language proficiency. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Language Development • Delete this highlight
Add a note
reading problems are best perceived as language problems, due to the reciprocal relationship between oral language and reading skills that continues throughout childhood (Fernald • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Students without established English academic language tend to develop significant reading comprehension deficits, even if their decoding skills are sufficiently developed • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Cummin’s linguistic interdependence hypothesis that posits the acquisition of a second language (e.g., English) in part depends on the adequate development of a student’s native language (e.g., Spanish). • Delete this highlight
Add a note
for ELs, it may be important to incorporate measures of English proficiency into the assessment decision-making process, • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Curriculum-Based Measures and CLD Students • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Curriculum-based assessment (CBA) is an approach to providing the information needed to improve instruction that includes either a focus on identifying the specific skills that need to be taught (e.g., Howell & Nolet, 1999), or identifying who is at risk and whether or not the support is reducing that risk (e.g., • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM), emphasizes that the use of assessment techniques are more general in focus, often called general outcome measures (GOM; Shinn, 1998), and concentrate decision-making on “when to change” instruction. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
At tier 1, CBE methods can be used as part of typical instruction to identify methods of differentiation that can help students master the skills taught. CBM tools can be used for screening to identify who needs additional support and could benefit from a tier 2 intervention as well as determine whether the intervention is having the desired effect. There is fairly substantial support that CBM tools can be used with students who are native English speakers (NES) for screening and progress monitoring (Shapiro, 2011). However, as detailed more fully later in this chapter, it is inappropriate to generalize the outcomes from NES to students who are CLD (Vanderwood • Delete this highlight
Add a note
From an assessment perspective, it is important to assess the areas most known to influence academic outcomes. In reading, those areas are the “big five” skills of phonemic awareness, alphabetic principal, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension (National Reading Panel, 2000). • Delete this highlight
Add a note
In mathematics, the targets are less clear than in reading, but do include the skills of computation, problem solving, and algebraic concepts (National Mathematics Advisory Panel, 2008). • Delete this highlight
Add a note
CBM include the use of “standard probes” that can be used across curricula and school districts (e.g., DIBELS, AIMSweb). The standard probe approach provides several advantages, such as the ability to improve the overall psychometric properties of the measures, with the goal of improving the information that is used to help guide the problem-solving process. The standard probe approach is especially useful for discreet skills such as phonemic awareness, phonics, and math computation. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
the challenge with interpreting the data is that most studies combine CLD students, especially ELs, into one group. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Validating CBM Measures with CLD Students • Delete this highlight
Add a note
A major emphasis of the Test Standards is the concept of the “equivalence” of scores when tests are used with groups that vary on some dimension that is known to affect the construct being measured. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
bias is considered to be “construct-irrelevant variance that result in systematically lower or higher scores for identifiable groups of examinees • Delete this highlight
Add a note
bias is not a mean difference between groups. Instead, bias occurs when the test scores obtained on a particular test by different subgroups has a different meaning in relation to other variables. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
In the context of CBM, bias would be considered to be present when scores predict with a different level of accuracy for one group (e.g., English Learners) than for another (e.g., native English speakers) on an important criterion measure (e.g., state test). • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Sensitivity refers to the percentage of students later found to have reading problems who were previously identified as at-risk for later reading problems. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Specificity is similar to sensitivity, but this term indicates the percentage of students later found not to have reading problems who had previously been identified as not at risk • Delete this highlight
Add a note
order to maximize predictive accuracy, sensitivity and specificity are critical for evaluating the quality of cut scores used with CBM tools for screening purposes. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
When CBM tools are used for progress monitoring, it is also important to know whether change over time can be detected by the tests (Shapiro, 2011), so that the results can be used to evaluate the impact of interventions. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Early Literacy CBM and CLD Research • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Table 11.1 Status of CBM Research with CLD Students • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Phonological Awareness. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Baker and Baker (2008) found that the best predictors of early reading in English for EL students were PA, print awareness, and alphabetic knowledge. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
PA is the conscious awareness of the structure of sound in speech. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
DIBELS phonemic segmentation fluency (PSF) task exhibited moderate to strong correlations with elision, blending words, and phonological awareness composite scores on a diagnostic assessment of PA (e.g., Comprehensive Test of Phonological Awareness—CTOPP). This relationship between PA CBM measures and well-established norm-referenced PA measure supports the use of PA CBMs (e.g., DIBELS PSF) as an initial diagnostic tool to inform reading intervention. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
PA is the awareness of sounds in oral language, while phonics is letter-sound correspondence in printed language • Delete this highlight
Add a note
it is appropriate to use phonics CBM measures with EL students when screening. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
recent longitudinal study with ELs by Lesaux and Siegel (2003) indicted phonics skills measured in kindergarten was the best single predictor of word reading and comprehension in second grade. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Fluency CBM and CLD Research • Delete this highlight
Add a note
fluency, which is the accurate and automatic reading of text. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
R-CBM and are also known as ORF (Oral Reading Fluency). • Delete this highlight
Add a note
No bias was found in second and third grade. However, bias was found in fourth and fifth grade. Specifically, ORF overestimated reading comprehension for the Black students and underestimated for the Caucasian students. From this study, grade appears to be a moderator of the presence of ethnicity bias. In • Delete this highlight
Add a note
language proficiency should be considered as a part of assessment and interpretation. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Vocabulary and Comprehension CBM and CLD Research • Delete this highlight
Add a note
There is agreement in the literature that a gap in vocabulary exists between economically disadvantaged and economically advantaged students throughout school, and that vocabulary is crucial in EL students’ success • Delete this highlight
Add a note
only a very limited amount of research has been done in this area connecting measures of vocabulary to critical outcomes measures. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
CBM measures that assess comprehension are commonly called MAZE tasks. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
For the MAZE task, words are deleted from a passage and the student must insert the appropriate word from a choice of words (Rathvon, • Delete this highlight
Add a note
This task is also known as a cloze-procedure assessment. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
DIBELS DAZE, • Delete this highlight
Add a note
MAZE explained additional variance beyond ORF for NES students but not for EL students. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
MAZE becomes more useful as a predictor of future reading performance when students get older and more proficient in English. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
MAZE was found to be able to capture improvement of performance over the year and differences in growth rate. Thus, this study supported the use of the MAZE task as a progress-monitoring tool with NES students. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Mathematics and Written Language CBM and CLD Research • Delete this highlight
Add a note
CBM measures in math are used to measure general math competence (e.g., early numeracy skills, math computation, and math problem solving). Regarding • Delete this highlight
Add a note
This evidence of only low to moderate validity may be due to the low degree of match between the content of math CBMs and standardized tests of math. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Regarding written language CBM, there are various methods that have been explored in the scoring of these measures. The primary scoring methods include examining total words written or correct letter sequences. However, other methods that may be utilized include holistic approaches, use of long words, use of punctuation, words spelled correctly, total punctuation marks, or words in complete sentences. The • Delete this highlight
Add a note
the following methods exhibited the greatest predictive validity for third grade: correct punctuation, total punctuation, and words in correct sequences. However, these validity values are still relatively inadequate, ranging from 0.31 to 0.36. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Overall, the review concluded that there is some evidence supporting the use of written language CBM in screening. However, these measures are inadequate for progress monitoring. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Recommendations and Future Research • Delete this highlight
Add a note
validity is the most fundamental aspect of test evaluation and requires a connection between the evidence collected and the use of the test. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
we targeted using CBMs in early literacy, reading, and math for the purposes of screening and progress monitoring with CLD students in K–12 settings. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
studies reviewed for this chapter were almost exclusively focused on EL students, and primarily Spanish-speaking EL students. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
almost all studies treated the EL group as though they are homogenous and would perform and respond in a similar manner. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
most studies with students who are CLD focused on grades K–6, with almost no evidence provided examining the use of CBMs in high school settings. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
the third challenge is that most of the validity evidence is focused on measures of oral reading fluency and early literacy. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
There is very little validity evidence for using math and written language CBMs with the CLD student population for screening and progress monitoring. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Fourth, the impact of cultural variability is significantly under-examined in the CBM literature, and what is available provides somewhat mixed results (e.g., • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Table 11.2 provides five recommendations that are supported by our review. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
CBM tools can be and should be used with the CLD K–6 student population for screening and progress monitoring. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
because other options with more evidence of validity do not exist, and there is a clear need for early identification and evaluation of interventions for students coming from CLD backgrounds. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
additional sources of data must be used to validate conclusions made based on CBM scores. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
convergent data are absolutely essential and must be routinely used when interpreting CBM scores. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
ELs should not be treated as one homogenous group and, as already stated, it appears there may be a need for cut-scores based on English language proficiency. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
suggesting the use of separate norms created for students at varying levels of English proficiency. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Students who are considered at the beginning stage of acquiring English language proficiency should probably be compared to similar students when attempting to understand how their reading skills compare to their peers. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Progress monitoring research suggests it is appropriate and most likely beneficial to keep expectations high for students who are CLD when they receive interventions and using NES rates of improvement and growth standards should lead to more frequent modifications and improvement of intensive interventions. • Delete this highlight
Add a note
Displaying 1 of 1 review