Using Curriculum-Based Measurement Fluency Data for Initial Screening Decisions

Lembke, Erica S.; Carlisle, Abigail; Poch, Apryl L.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-2803-3_4

Cited by 4 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nominated students with parental consent completed two forms each of CBM word dictation and picture word (described in Measures). Word dictation was scored for CLS and picture word was scored for CWS, given these metrics have the most consistent evidence of reliability and criterion-related validity (Lembke, Allen, & Poch, 2015). Research staff scored CBM protocols, entered the data into a spreadsheet, and selected the three students per teacher who scored lowest on both measures.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Scores include WW, WSC, CLS, and CILS. For Grades 1–3, alternate-form reliability for 3-min samples has been reported as r = .89 to .95, and criterion validity with quantitative scores from writing samples and standardized tests has ranged from r = .29 to .75 (Lembke et al, 2015; Lembke, Deno, & Hall, 2003). Prompts administered weekly for 8 weeks have been shown to be sensitive to growth (Hampton & Lembke, 2016).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Supporting teachers’ use of data-based instruction to improve students’ early writing skills.

McMaster¹,

Lembke²,

Shin³

et al. 2020

Journal of Educational Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supporting teachers’ use of data-based instruction to improve students’ early writing skills.

McMaster¹,

Lembke²,

Shin³

et al. 2020

Journal of Educational Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Written responses are scored for total words written, words spelled correctly, correct word sequences (i.e., any two sequential words that are spelled, punctuated, and used correctly within the context of the writing), and correct minus incorrect word sequences. Alternate form reliability for Grades 1 to 3 has been found to be r = .50 to .60 (Lembke et al, 2015; McMaster et al, 2009). For the current sample, alternate form reliability coefficients were r = .81 to .91 (pretest; median = 0.85) to r = .86 to .90 (posttest; median = 0.87) (McMaster et al, 2020).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Written responses are scored for total words written, words spelled correctly, correct word sequences, and correct minus incorrect word sequences. Alternate form reliability for Grades 1 to 3 has been found to be r = .74 to .88 (Lembke et al, 2015). For the current sample, alternate form reliability coefficients were r = .71 to .89 (given only at posttest; median = 0.82; McMaster et al, 2020).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the purpose of this study, scale scores were calculated for all three CBM-Writing tasks, maintaining a normal distribution. To create the scale scores, unpublished benchmarking data (Lembke et al, 2015) on 603 students in Grades 1 through 3 were used. Means and standard deviations were calculated on all three CBM-Writing tasks that were then linearly transformed to set the mean at 100 and SD at 15.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Exploring the Relation Between Teacher Factors and Student Growth in Early Writing

Bresina

McMaster

2020

J Learn Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data from a small randomized control trial of teachers’ use of Data-Based Instruction (DBI) for early writing were analyzed to determine the influence of teacher knowledge, skills, and treatment fidelity on student Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM) slope. Participants included 11 elementary grade teachers who delivered intensive intervention in early writing and their students ( n = 31), all identified as either at risk for or with disabilities that affect their writing. Teachers received professional development and ongoing coaching to support the implementation of DBI for improving their students’ early writing skills. Results from a multiple regression analysis suggest that teacher knowledge and skills in DBI was strongly related to student CBM slope in early writing ( p < .01) and a small but significant relation between fidelity of writing instruction and student CBM slope ( p < .01). Implications for instructional coaching and improving student writing progress are discussed.

show abstract

Longitudinal effects of data-based instructional changes for students with intensive learning needs: A piecewise linear–linear mixed-effects modeling approach.

Choi,

McMaster,

Kohli

et al. 2024

Journal of Educational Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For students with intensive learning needs for whom standard, validated interventions do not effectively promote academic growth, data-based instruction (DBI) is suggested as an effective, fine-grained approach to individualization. Key to DBI's success is making instructional changes based on individual students' progress monitoring data. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of such instructional changes on student early writing outcomes. We applied a piecewise linear-linear mixed-effects (PLME) model to determine student writing growth trajectories before and after teachers introduced instructional changes. Using data from 46 elementary school students with intensive writing intervention needs, results showed that a PLME model with two segmented slopes-before and after the change-best explained students' observed change in writing scores. Results also showed that a higher level of initial writing skills was associated with higher levels of intercepts and additional growth gains after the instructional change, whereas the type of instructional change was not associated with predicted writing trajectories. We discuss the implications of positive effects of teachers' individualized timely decisions to change instruction using progress monitoring data as well as unexpected findings and study limitations such as small sample size and inconsistency in results. Educational Impact and Implications StatementWhen individualizing instruction for students with the most intensive academic intervention needs, especially in writing, it is recommended that teachers use student progress data to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction. Teachers are encouraged to change their instruction if the data indicates that students are not progressing as expected. We examined whether the instructional changes made by elementary special education teachers while implementing data-based instruction (DBI) improved the early writing outcomes of struggling beginning writers. When teachers made appropriate decisions to change instruction for those students who were experiencing slower-than-expected writing progress within DBI, the students showed facilitated writing growth following these instructional changes.

show abstract

Using Curriculum-Based Measurement Fluency Data for Initial Screening Decisions

Cited by 4 publications

References 52 publications

Supporting teachers’ use of data-based instruction to improve students’ early writing skills.

Supporting teachers’ use of data-based instruction to improve students’ early writing skills.

Exploring the Relation Between Teacher Factors and Student Growth in Early Writing

Longitudinal effects of data-based instructional changes for students with intensive learning needs: A piecewise linear–linear mixed-effects modeling approach.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About