The Contribution of Skills Analysis to Curriculum-Based Measurement in Spelling

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the contribution of ongoing skills analysis to Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM). Thirty special educators were assigned randomly to treatment groups, including a control condition and different levels of CBM analysis, one of which included graphed performance indicators with skills analysis; one, graphed performance indicators only; and another, graphed performance indicators with ordered lists of student spellings. Teachers who used skills analysis effected, better achievement than controls and than CBM teachers who had no additional analysis. Although the mean achievement of students whose teachers had skills analysis was greater than that of teachers who inspected ordered lists of errors, the difference in achievement was not reliable, and the teachers who inspected errors effected greater growth than controls. Implications for CBM practice are discussed.

Evaluation of Oxon English Textbook Used in Pakistan Public Schools for 6th & 7th Grade

“…All these aspects are included in formative evaluation. Both summative and formative evaluation carries equal importance according to various scholars like (Fuchs & Fuchs, 1986;Fuchs, Fuchs, Hamlett, & Allinder, 1991;Fuchs, Fuchs, Hamlett, & Stecker, 1990;Salvia, Ysseldyke, & Bolt, 2007). Scriven (1967) devised the term formative evaluation in reference to curriculum development but Bloom and colleagues' (1971) application to education hypothesized it as the "systematic evaluation in the process of curriculum construction, teaching and learning for the purposes of improving any of these three processes: (p. 117).…”

An examination of alternate assessment durations when assessing multiple-skill computational fluency: The generalizability and dependability of curriculum-based outcomes within the context of educational decisions

“…The CBM literature in the area of mathematics (M-CBM) is replete with studies that demonstrate its utility for making educational decisions. Research supports the use of M-CBM for the purposes of progress monitoring (Allinder, 1996;Allinder & Beck, 1995;Stecker & Fuchs, 2000), modifying instruction for class groups (Fuchs, Fuchs, Hamlett, & Phillips, 1994;Whinnery & Fuchs, 1992), informing instructional groupings Fuchs, Fuchs, Bishop, & Hamlett, 1992;Spicuzza et al, 2001), modifying instruction for students with special needs (Fuchs, Fuchs, & Hamlett, 1989;Fuchs et al, 1994;Whinnery & Fuchs, 1992), identifying academic strengths and weaknesses (Fuchs et al, 1989;Fuchs, Fuchs, Hamlett, & Stecker, 1990), supporting peer-assisted learning (Calhoon & Fuchs, 2003), and predicting performance on statewide assessments (Helwig, Anderson, & Tindal, 2002).When CBM is used to assess computational fluency performance is quantified as the number of digits written correctly per unit of time. A review of the professional literature suggests that this metric for computational fluency is more sensitive to student growth than accuracy measures, which do not account for the rate of performance…”

Use of Curriculum-Based Measurement in Identifying Students with Disabilities

“…These diagnostic profiles demonstrate adequate reliability and validity (see Fuchs, Fuchs, Hamlett, & Allinder, 1989;Fuchs, Fuchs, Hamlett, Thompson, Roberts, Kubec, & Stecker, in press), offer the advantage of being rooted in the local curriculum, provide a framework for determining strategies for improving student programs (see , and result in teachers planning more varied, specific, and responsive instruction to meet individual student needs (Fuchs, Fuchs, Hamlett, & Allinder, 1991).…”