Caren Wesson

Curriculum-Based Measurement and Two Models of Follow-up Consultation

This investigation focused on the effects of two independent variables; (a) teacher-developed goals and monitoring systems versus a curriculum-based measurement (CBM) goal and monitoring system; and (b) individual expert versus group follow-up consultation. The dependent data were academic achievement measures. Subjects were 55 special education, elementary school students with mild and moderate disabilities randomly assigned to one of four treatment conditions: A, teacher-developed goal and progress monitoring with individual expert follow-up consultation; B, CBM goal and progress monitoring with individual expert follow-up consultation; C, teacher-developed goal and progress monitoring with group follow-up consultation; and D, CBM goal and progress monitoring with group follow-up consultation. Results showed that groups employing CBM and group consultation generally out-performed the other groups. Implications included expanded use of CBM goals and progress monitoring and continued study of collaboration as a method of CBM program implementation.

How to Write Effective Data-Based IEFs

• The procedure presented here represents a databased system for writing individualized education program (IEP) goals. It directly reflects the results of initial assessment and readily lends itself to systematic use throughout the school year. This procedure hinges on a simple (yet reliable and valid) measurement system specifically designed to evaluate general improvement in academic skills. The unique features of this system are frequent repeated measurement of student performance in the context of the local school curriculum, and measurement at a constant level of task difficulty. A specific level of performance on the task represents the longterm goal. Increases in level of performance on that task indicate that the student is making progress toward goal achievement.

Minimum Standards for the Description of Participants in Learning Disabilities Research

In 1984, the research committee of the council for learning disabilities (CLD) noted that the available descriptions of individuals with LD in research reports were vague and inconsistent. Recognizing that such descriptions made it difficult to evaluate research findings, the committee recommended that specific guidelines for participant descriptions be followed in reports on research involving individuals with LD. Eight years after this call for greater uniformity, vague participant descriptors remain a matter of great concern. What follows is a report on this issue from the current cld research committee. Updated guidelines for the description of participants are provided for both small-sample and large-group research activities. Also, suggestions for promoting compliance with the minimum standards are forwarded. Rather than being viewed as a fixed, immutable product, the current attempt at identifying the minimum standards for the description of participants should be viewed merely as one step in an ongoing process. Clearly, as our multidisciplinary field continues to learn more about LD, additional information about participants may be deemed necessary. With this in mind, the cld research committee welcomes your comments on the present set of guidelines and invites your suggestions for future iterations of this document.

An Analysis of Long-Term Instructional Plans in Reading for Elementary Resource Room Students

Long-term instructional plans for one academic year for 62 elementary resource room students were examined to determine the type of reading instruction planned with respect to the number and type of activities per day, duration of the activities, and changes made in the plan. Also of interest were the motivational strategies, teaching arrangements, and degree of overlap of plans written by the same teacher for two or more students. The plans written by 22 teachers indicated that students spend about half of their resource room time in a one-to-one situation reading aloud to the teacher and about one-third of the time working independently. There is little instruction unique for individual students. Implications for teacher training and directions for future research are included.

Portfolio Assessment and Special Education Students.

Special education teachers constantly ask questions like these as they use ongoing assessments to make decisions about instruction for their students. Teachers make hypotheses, collect data, and test their hypotheses about optimal instructional programs. In a test-teach-test cycle. we continually evaluate the effects of our instruction to ensure that students are progressing at acceptable rates. We assess students through criterion-referenced assessment, basal mastery tests, curriculum-based assessment, and other informal and formal measures. An emerging trend in curriculum and instruction suggests that we can no longer prepare students fully for their adult lives but rather need to help students understand that learning is a lifelong process. We need to teach students how to learn and to think about how that learning occurs. Through such instruction, students learn with a sense of ownership as they are involved in decision making in partnership with their teachers. New ideas for assessment are emerging as well-such as portfolio assessment. Special educators may discover that this is a useful tool used in conjunction with their teaching goals (Vavrus. 1990). As reform in general education continues, we need to keep abreast of new assessment practices.

Facilitating the Efficiency of On-Going Curriculum-Based Measurement.

This paper presents four studies that examine the time required to implement direct and frequent curriculum-based measurement (CBM) as well as strategies to improve the efficiency of CBM. Ten rural special education resource teachers were the subjects. The dependent data for all studies are the total amount of time required for CBM, including teacher preparation time, direction of students, and scoring and graphing. Teacher satisfaction with the various treatment conditions is also described. Study 1 compares the time required for CBM in initial training sessions and in subsequent classroom use. Studies 2 and 3 employ a single-subject design with the same baseline and treatment phases across 10 subjects. The independent variables are a specified order of administration of the CBM tasks (Study 2) and the establishment of a daily schedule of measurement (Study 3). Study 4 also employs a single case study methodology, reversal to baseline, but with teacher-selected independent variables including use of aides and machinery to administer CBM tasks, and group administration of the tasks. The independent variables proved to have varying effects on teacher efficiency. Implications for teaching practices are discussed.

The Role of Curriculum-Based Measurement in Portfolio Assessment

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.

Characteristics of Time-Series Data Collected through Curriculum-Based Reading Measurement.

Research on the analysis of time-series data has shown that decisions reached through visual analysis of the data may be influenced by the statistical parameters of those data. This study investigated the statistical properties of curriculum-based time-series data for 67 resource room students in three Minnesota school districts. Data for slope, standard error of estimate, and mean level of performance are presented. Results suggest that reading growth over time may be described by a negatively accelerated curve and that the statistical characterisics of time-series data are not necessarily independent in naturally occurring data. Implications for both time-series and conventional pre-post designs are discussed.

Developing a Collaborative Partnership through a Professional Development School.

We encourage our readers to submit ideas, suggestions, or manuscripts for Spotlight. This feature of Intervention focuses on a specific school program, clinic, camp, or individual concerned with special and remedial education. We would be pleased to assist our readers in developing an article for this column.—GW

The discriminative validity of curriculum‐based measures for establishing reading groups

Abstract The task of establishing reading groups for an elementary teacher is a critical educational decision. This study examines the basic literature on the various methods and then proposes a new method of establishing reading groups based on Curriculum‐Based Measurement (Deno, 1985). Reading groups established using currciulum‐based measures were compared to groups established over a seven month period by teachers in grades one through four. The curriculum‐base measurement technique required less than five minutes per student and resulted in the establishment of nearly identical groups to those composed by the teachers. The results suggest that the method described can be potentially effective and efficient in establishing reading groups.