Cited by 37Behavioral and Psychological StudiesEducational Assessment and ImprovementEducational Assessment and Pedagogy

Computers and Curriculum-Based Measurement: Effects of Teacher Feedback Systems

Fuchs, Lynn S., Fuchs, Douglas, Hamlett, Carol L.·1989·School Psychology Review

Abstract

This study assessed the effects of computerized teacher feedback systems within curriculum-based measurement (CBM) in the area of spelling. Subjects were 27 special education teachers, each of whom selected two mildly handicapped pupils for participation. For 15 weeks, each teacher was assigned randomly to one of two CBM groups, enhanced feedback or unenhanced feedback, or to a control group. CBM teachers used software that stored, graphed, and analyzed assessment information. With enhanced feedback, CBM teachers were required to inspect graphed assessment information and formulate their own decisions about the adequacy of student progress; the computer provided corrective and instructive feedback. With unenhanced feedback, decisions concerning student progress were provided to teachers without their input and without computer feedback. Control teachers monitored progress using conventional practice. Multivariate analyses of variance conducted on fidelity of treatment measures indicated that CBM teachers implemented procedures with comparable accuracy, except that the enhanced feedback group complied with instructional decision rules better by timing their instructional modifications more accurately. Analysis of covariance indicated that spelling achievement of students in the enhanced feedback group exceeded that of controls, whereas achievement of students in the unenhanced feedback group did not. Implications for CBM practice and for computer-managed assessment are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02796015.1989.12085405

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Hamlett, C. L.
Affiliations
Vanderbilt University (US)
Venue
School Psychology Review
Published
1989-03-01
Volume
18
Issue
1
Pages
112-125
ISSN
  • 0279-6015 (ISSN-L)
  • 2372-966X
OpenAlex
W335263614
Cited by
37
References
22
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
4.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
School Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Educational Assessment and Improvement
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
Keywords
curriculum-based measurement, teacher feedback, spelling achievement, mildly handicapped students, special education teachers, computer-based testing, intervention fidelity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review