The DOI matches its Crossref record.
New and Existing Curriculum-Based Writing Measures: Technical Features Within and Across Grades
Abstract
.The purpose of this study was to examine technical features of new and existing curriculum-based measures of written expression in terms of writing task, duration, and scoring procedures. Twenty-five third-, 43 fifth-, and 55 seventh- graders completed passage-copying tasks in 1.5 min and picture, narrative, and expository writing prompts in 3–7 min. Samples were scored quantitatively. Measures that yielded sufficient alternate-form reliability were examined to determine which had sufficient criterion validity, and those with sufficient criterion validity were examined to determine which detected growth from fall to spring. Different types of tasks yielded varying levels of technical adequacy at each grade, with longer durations having stronger technical adequacy for older students and more complex scoring procedures having stronger technical adequacy for all students. Narrative writing appeared most promising in terms of its technical adequacy across grades. Implications for monitoring progress within and across grades are discussed.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Meta-Analysis of Criterion Validity for Curriculum-Based Measurement in Written Language
Romig, J. E., Therrien, W. J., & Lloyd, J. W. (2016) · The Journal of Special Education · doi:10.1177/0022466916670637 · Cited by 102
Curriculum-Based Measures of Beginning Writing: Technical Features of the Slope
McMaster, K. L., Du, X., Yeo, S., Deno, S. L., Parker, D. C., & Ellis, T. (2011) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/001440291107700203 · Cited by 83
“Because transcription skills involved in copying appear to relate to writing proficiency, and copying tasks have related well to other writing out- comes in previous CBM research (e.g., Lembke et al., 2003; McMaster & Campbell, 2008), we examined copying as one progress monitoring task.”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationKim, Y. G., Gatlin, B., Otaiba, S. A., & Wanzek, J. (2017) · Journal of Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1177/0022219417712016 · Cited by 68
“…measures have shown to be reliable and valid (for reviews, see Gansle et al., 2004; Gansle, Noell, VanDerHeyden, Naquin, & Slider, 2002; Jewell & Malecki, 2005; Lembke, Deno, & Hall, 2003; McMaster et al., 2009; McMaster & Campbell, 2008; McMaster & Espin, 2007; McMaster, Ritchey, & Lembke, 2011).”
Assessing children's writing products: the role of curriculum based measures
Dockrell, J. E., Connelly, V. J., Walter, K., et al. (2014) · British Educational Research Journal · doi:10.1002/berj.3162 · Cited by 67
“Narrative probes have demonstrated the best technical adequacy to date (see McMaster & Campbell, 2008).”
BackgroundCurriculum-Based Measurement: A Brief History of Nearly Everything from the 1970s to the Present
Tindal, G. (2013) · ISRN Education · doi:10.1155/2013/958530 · Cited by 59
Wilson, J., Olinghouse, N. G., McCoach, D. B., Santangelo, T., & Andrada, G. N. (2015) · Assessing Writing · doi:10.1016/j.asw.2015.06.003 · Cited by 52
An Investigation of the Validity and Utility of Two Curriculum-Based Measurement Writing Tasks
Ritchey, K. D., & Coker, D. L. (2012) · Reading & Writing Quarterly · doi:10.1080/10573569.2013.741957 · Cited by 44
“Both word and sentence copying tasks have demonstrated promising reliability and validity with students in first and second grades (Lembke, Deno, & Hall, 2003; McMaster et al., 2009), and passage copying has shown promise with third graders (McMaster & Campbell, 2008).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialIndicators of Fluent Writing in Beginning Writers
Ritchey, K. D., McMaster, K. L., Otaiba, S. A., Puranik, C. S., Kim, Y. G., Parker, D. C., & Ortiz, M. B. (2015) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-2803-3_2 · Cited by 45
Self-citationEnnis, R. P., Jolivette, K., & Boden, L. J. (2013) · Education and Treatment of Children · doi:10.1353/etc.2013.0026 · Cited by 39
“This is consistent with other researchers evaluating the best method of writing assessment (e.g., Hosp et al., 2007; McMaster & Campbell, 2008).”
ResultClemens, N. H., Keller‐Margulis, M. A., Scholten, T., & Yoon, M. (2015) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-7568-3_12 · Cited by 45
Wilson, J. (2018) · Journal of School Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2017.12.005 · Cited by 34
Codding, R. S., Petscher, Y., & Truckenmiller, A. J. (2014) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0037520 · Cited by 32
“A uthor M anuscript A uthor M anuscript A uthor M anuscript A uthor M anuscript CIWS are the most useful measures (Lopez & Thompson, 2011; McMaster & Campbell, 2008), with CIWS showing the highest criterion validity in the middle-school age group (Espin et al., 2000).”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialKoenig, E. A., Eckert, T. L., & Hier, B. O. (2016) · School Psychology Review · doi:10.17105/spr45-3.275-295 · Cited by 38
“Second, studies examining the sensitivity of CBM-WE writing metrics for detecting growth over time among third-grade students (Malecki & Jewell, 2003; McMaster & Campbell, 2008) demonstrated the superiority of using correct writing sequences.”
BackgroundMcMaster, K. L., Shin, J., Espin, C. A., Jung, P., Wayman, M. M., & Deno, S. L. (2017) · Reading and Writing · doi:10.1007/s11145-017-9766-9 · Cited by 30
Self-citationTruckenmiller, A. J., Eckert, T. L., Codding, R. S., & Petscher, Y. (2014) · Journal of School Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2014.09.001 · Cited by 29
“Reviews of the technical adequacy of CBM-WE suggest that choice of metric to use depends on students' grade level and the purpose of the measurement (McMaster & Campbell, 2008; McMaster & Espin, 2007).”
Curriculum-based measurement for beginning writers: recent developments and future directions
McMaster, K. L., Ritchey, K. D., & Lembke, E. S. (2011) · Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities · doi:10.1108/s0735-004x(2011)0000024008 · Cited by 27
Self-citationFurey, W. M., Marcotte, A. M., Hintze, J. M., et al. (2015) · School Psychology Quarterly · doi:10.1037/spq0000138 · Cited by 26
Keller‐Margulis, M. A., Payan, A., Jaspers, K. E., & Brewton, C. M. (2015) · Reading & Writing Quarterly · doi:10.1080/10573569.2014.964352 · Cited by 26
“…the relationship between WE-CBM and statewide achievement tests, including Indiana, Louisiana, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Arizona (Campbell et al., 2013; Gansle et al., 2002; López & Thompson, 2011; McMaster & Campbell, 2008; Mercer, Martı́nez, Faust, & Mitchell, 2012; Weissenburger & Espin, 2005).”
BackgroundTechnical Adequacy of Curriculum-Based Measures in Writing in Grades 1–3
Allen, A. A., Jung, P., Poch, A. L., Brandes, D., Shin, J., Lembke, E. S., & McMaster, K. L. (2019) · Reading & Writing Quarterly · doi:10.1080/10573569.2019.1689211 · Cited by 26
“…accurate representation of writing proficiency for older students compared to younger students, which reflects some previous research (Deno et al., 1980; McMaster & Campbell, 2008) but seems to conflict with findings from other first-grade studies (McMaster et al., 2009; McMaster, Du et al., 2011).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialSelf-citationThe technical adequacy of curriculum-based writing measures with English learners
Campbell, H. M., Espin, C. A., & McMaster, K. L. (2012) · Reading and Writing · doi:10.1007/s11145-012-9375-6 · Cited by 24
“…have supported the technical adequacy of correct and correct minus incorrect word sequences as CBM indicators of general writing proficiency (Amato & Watkins, 2011; Cheng & Rose, 2009; Diercks-Gransee, Weissenburger, Johnson, & Christensen, 2009; López & Thompson, 2011; McMaster & Campbell, 2008).”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationAssessing the Writing of Struggling Learners
Olinghouse, N. G., & Santangelo, T. (2010) · Focus on Exceptional Children · doi:10.17161/foec.v43i4.6908 · Cited by 23
Wilson, J., Myers, M. C., & Potter, A. A. (2022) · Assessment in Education Principles Policy and Practice · doi:10.1080/0969594x.2022.2025762 · Cited by 26
“Therefore, students’ growth in writing performance in one genre may not be indicative of growth in another genre (McMaster & Campbell, 2008).”
BackgroundAn Application of Brief Experimental Analysis with Early Writing
Parker, D. C., Dickey, B. N., Burns, M. K., & McMaster, K. L. (2012) · Journal of Behavioral Education · doi:10.1007/s10864-012-9151-3 · Cited by 22
Self-citationAn Exploration of Alternative Scoring Methods Using Curriculum-Based Measurement in Early Writing
Allen, A. A., Poch, A. L., & Lembke, E. S. (2017) · Learning Disability Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0731948717725490 · Cited by 20
“…reliability (r > .70) and criterion-related validity (r > .60) for use in kindergarten through third grade (Coker & Ritchey, 2013; Deno, Mirkin, & Marston, 1980; Deno, Mirkin, Marston, & Lowry, 1982; Lembke et al., 2003; McMaster & Campbell, 2008; McMaster et al., 2009; McMaster et al., 2011).”
BackgroundPerformance feedback during writing instruction: A cost-effectiveness analysis.
Barrett, C. A., Truckenmiller, A. J., & Eckert, T. L. (2020) · School Psychology · doi:10.1037/spq0000356 · Cited by 19
Expanding Curriculum-Based Measurement in Written Expression for Middle School
Truckenmiller, A. J., McKindles, J. V., Petscher, Y., Eckert, T. L., & Tock, J. L. (2019) · The Journal of Special Education · doi:10.1177/0022466919887150 · Cited by 19
“Newer prompt types for younger elementary students include picture, picture-word, sentence story starters, and passage-copying (Campbell, Espin, & McMaster, 2013; McMaster & Campbell, 2008; Ritchey & Coker, 2013).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialMeta-Analysis of Prompt and Duration for Curriculum-Based Measurement of Written Language
Romig, J. E., Miller, A. A., Therrien, W. J., & Lloyd, J. W. (2020) · Exceptionality · doi:10.1080/09362835.2020.1743706 · Cited by 18
“Some examples include sentence copying (McMaster et al., 2009), passage copying (McMaster & Campbell, 2008), and sentence writing (Coker & Ritchey, 2010).”
BackgroundKeller‐Margulis, M. A., Mercer, S. H., & Matta, M. (2021) · Reading and Writing · doi:10.1007/s11145-021-10153-6 · Cited by 17
Measuring Academic Output During the Good Behavior Game: A Single Case Design Study
Fallon, L. M., Marcotte, A. M., & Ferron, J. M. (2019) · Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions · doi:10.1177/1098300719872778 · Cited by 15
“Both are considered traditional CBM estimates for written expression with convergent validity evidence, useful for progress monitoring and intervention decision-making (McMaster & Campbell, 2008).”
BackgroundCheng, S.-F., & Rose, S. D. (2009) · The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education · doi:10.1093/deafed/enp013 · Cited by 13
Extending Curriculum‐based Assessment to Early Writing
Parker, D. C., Burns, M. K., McMaster, K. L., et al. (2012) · Learning Disabilities Research and Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00348.x · Cited by 13
“First, Step 2 of the model describes writing assessments that have been validated only for writers starting in Grade 2 (McMaster & Campbell, 2008; McMaster & Espin, 2007).”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationWriting Development in Struggling Learners
Miller, B., McCardle, P., & Connelly, V. J. (2018) · BRILL eBooks · doi:10.1163/9789004346369 · Cited by 13
Assessing Teacher Usability of Written Expression Curriculum-Based Measurement
Payan, A., Keller‐Margulis, M. A., Burridge, A. B., et al. (2018) · Assessment for Effective Intervention · doi:10.1177/1534508418781007 · Cited by 12
Using Data-Based Instruction to Support Struggling Elementary Writers
Poch, A. L., Allen, A. A., Jung, P., Lembke, E. S., & McMaster, K. L. (2021) · Intervention in School and Clinic · doi:10.1177/10534512211014835 · Cited by 11
“These CBM tasks and their corresponding scoring metrics have extensive evidence of reliability and validity (Allen et al., 2020; Hampton & Lembke, 2016; McMaster & Campbell, 2008; McMaster & Espin, 2007; McMaster et al., 2009, 2011; Parker et al., 1991; Videen et al., 1982).”
BackgroundSelf-citationCampbell, H. M. (2010) · Reading & Writing Quarterly · doi:10.1080/10573569.2010.500253 · Cited by 11
“With Englishproficient third and seventh graders, McMaster (2008) also obtained moderate validity correlations between the TOWL–3 and curriculum-based passagecopying scoring procedures of CW (rs¼ .41–.55), CWS (rs¼ .42–.66), and CIWS (r¼ .41).”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationValentine, K. A., Truckenmiller, A. J., Troia, G. A., & Aldridge, S. (2021) · Assessing Writing · doi:10.1016/j.asw.2021.100567 · Cited by 7
Using Curriculum-Based Measurement for Struggling Beginning
McMaster, K. L., Du, X., Parker, D. C., et al. (2011) · Teaching Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/004005991104400203 · Cited by 8
Self-citationArrimada, M., de León, U., Torrance, M., Fidalgo, R., & de León, U. (2019) · Papeles del Psicólogo - Psychologist Papers · doi:10.23923/pap.psicol2020.2918 · Cited by 7
Universal Screening for Writing Risk in Spanish-Speaking First Graders
Gil, V., de León, S. C., & Jiménez, J. E. (2020) · Reading & Writing Quarterly · doi:10.1080/10573569.2020.1733451 · Cited by 8
Schnee, A. K. (2010) · Lincoln (University of Nebraska) · Cited by 7
The Role of Curriculum Based Measures in Assessing Writing Products
Dockrell, J. E., Connelly, V. J., Walter, K., et al. (2017) · BRILL eBooks · doi:10.1163/9789004346369_011 · Cited by 7
“Narrative probes have demonstrated the best technical adequacy to date (see McMaster & Campbell, 2008).”
BackgroundPoch, A. L., Allen, A. A., & Lembke, E. S. (2018) · Psychology in the Schools · doi:10.1002/pits.22220 · Cited by 7
Technical Features of Slopes for Curriculum-Based Measures of Secondary Writing
Romig, J. E., & Olsen, A. A. (2021) · Reading & Writing Quarterly · doi:10.1080/10573569.2020.1860841 · Cited by 6
“Previous research has demonstrated the ability of CBM-W to be sensitive to growth over an academic year for middle school students (Codding et al., 2015; Fearington et al., 2014; Malecki & Jewell, 2003; McMaster & Campbell, 2008).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialAccounting for Levels of Language in Narrative and Expository Writing
Datchuk, S. M., Hier, B. O., & Watts, E. A. (2021) · The Elementary School Journal · doi:10.1086/714051 · Cited by 6
“Second, in line with other research on writing fluency tasks for elementary students (e.g., McMaster & Campbell, 2008), there appeared to be substantial differences between narrative and expository writing tasks on a number of variables; however, because this study was not designed to directly…”
ResultWriting productivity development in elementary school: A systematic review
Martin, C., & Dockrell, J. E. (2024) · Assessing Writing · doi:10.1016/j.asw.2024.100834 · Cited by 5
“However, McMaster and Campbell (2008) state that narrative writing appeared to be the most promising in terms of its technical adequacy across grades.”
InfluentialMatta, M., Mercer, S. H., & Keller‐Margulis, M. A. (2022) · Assessment in Education Principles Policy and Practice · doi:10.1080/0969594x.2022.2043240 · Cited by 5
“In terms of absolute criteria, we considered acceptable validity for Pearson’s r above .50, a commonly used threshold in the context of WE-CBM (McMaster & Campbell, 2008); we also considered AUC values above .95 as indicators of excellent accuracy, values between .85–.95 as very good, values…”
MethodIgnacio, P. L., McCurdy, M., White, J., Auge, M. B., Skinner, C. H., & Schwartz‐Micheaux, J. (2019) · Psychology in the Schools · doi:10.1002/pits.22286 · Cited by 5
Winkes, J., & Schaller, P. (2022) · Vierteljahresschrift für Heilpädagogik und ihre Nachbargebiete · doi:10.2378/vhn2022.art22d · Cited by 4
Patterns of Growth: Cluster Analysis of Written Expression Curriculum-Based Measurement
Weiss, S. L., Brinkley, J., & Bock, J. (2019) · Education and Treatment of Children · doi:10.1353/etc.2019.0008 · Cited by 3
“Correct Word Sequences (CWS) is a valid and reliable indicator of narrative writing for students in grades three and above (McMaster & Campbell, 2008) and is a useful screening measure since it differentiates between students with and without learning disabilities (Watkinson & Lee, 1992).”
BackgroundModel, Engage, Write, and Evaluate: A Model for Informative Writing
Moller, J., Cheek, E. H., Ortlieb, E., et al. (2011) · Journal of Studies in Education · doi:10.5296/jse.v2i1.1328 · Cited by 3
Schüler, L. (2021) · Zeitschrift für Angewandte Linguistik · doi:10.1515/zfal-2021-2077 · Cited by 3
A literature synthesis of curriculum‐based measurement in writing for English learners
Smith, R. A., Allen, A. A., & Alley, J. (2023) · Psychology in the Schools · doi:10.1002/pits.23121 · Cited by 3
Reed, D. K., Binning, K., Jemison, E. A., et al. (2023) · Learning Disabilities Research and Practice · doi:10.1111/ldrp.12300 · Cited by 3
Growth Rates of Curriculum-Based Measurement-Written Expression at the Elementary School Level
Tadatada, A. (2011) · TopSCHOLAR (Western Kentucky University) · Cited by 3
Mercer, S. H., & Cannon, J. E. (2022) · Journal for Educational Research Online / Journal für Bildungsforschung Online · doi:10.31244/jero.2022.01.03 · Cited by 2
Romig, J. E., Olsen, A. A., Medina, E., & Tulloh, A. (2025) · Assessing Writing · doi:10.1016/j.asw.2025.100958 · Cited by 2
Eckert, T. L., Maguire, S. C., Nelson, K. A., Amidon, S. Y. M., Goldstein, A. R., Antoine, M. S., Circe, J. J., Alderman, S. V., & Young, T. J. (2023) · Psychology in the Schools · doi:10.1002/pits.23063 · Cited by 2
Hierarchieniedrige Schreibfähigkeiten und Schreibflüssigkeit: Ein mehrdeutiges Konstrukt
Sturm, A. (2024) · Lernen und Lernstörungen · doi:10.1024/2235-0977/a000436 · Cited by 2
Ennis, R. P. (2022) · Digital Archive @ GSU · doi:10.57709/3832144 · Cited by 1
Miller, K. (2013) · Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research · Cited by 1
Assessing the Writing of Struggling Learners
Olinghouse, N. G., & Santangelo, T. (2017) · Focus on Exceptional Children · doi:10.17161/fec.v43i4.6908 · Cited by 1
Examining the Potential Use of Instructionally-Relevant Assessment Data in Early Writing
Parker, D. C. (2012) · University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy (University of Minnesota) · Cited by 1
Hier, B. O. (2012) · Syracuse University Libraries (Syracuse University) · Cited by 1
Du, X. (2009) · University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy (University of Minnesota) · Cited by 1
Using Self-Regulated Strategy Development with At-Risk Writers with Asperger Syndrome
Booker, L. M. (2013) · Lincoln (University of Nebraska)
Alternate Forms Reliability for Written Expression Probes
Carey, A. (2014) · TopSCHOLAR (Western Kentucky University)
Evidence-Based Assessment and Intervention for Problems with Writing in School Psychology
Kurasaki, R. E., Bloor, K., Sy, M. C., et al. (2017) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-45166-4_11
Regina, A. (2012) · TSpace (University of Toronto)
Chenier, K. H. (2014) · doi:10.31390/gradschool_dissertations.2864
“Four additional measures that have shown promise in recent research on writing CBM (Gansle et al., 2002; Gansle et al., 2004; Gansle et al., 2006; Jewell & Malecki, 2005; McMaster & Campbell, 2008) were used as well.”
BackgroundResultInfluentialMercer, S. H., & Cannon, J. (2021) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/yh3zj
“Consistent with WE-CBM validity studies, we interpreted correlation coefficients of r = .50 as the minimally sufficient value for validity evidence (McMaster & Campbell, 2008), with values above r = .60 preferred and consistent with evidence standards used by the National Center on Intensive…”
MethodBoosting Writing Success: Exploring Attitudes and Proficiency in a Performance Feedback Intervention
Alderman, S. V., & Eckert, T. L. (2026) · Reading & Writing Quarterly · doi:10.1080/10573569.2026.2686335
Monitoring The Writing Progress Of English Learners In The Secondary Setting
Ellis, S. (2015) · Digital Commons - Hamline (Hamline University)
Rymanowski, J. L. (2011) · Syracuse University Libraries (Syracuse University)
Metadata
- Authors
- McMaster, K. L., & Campbell, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Minnesota (US)
- St. Olaf College (US)
- Corresponding author
- McMaster, Kristen L.
- ORCID
- McMaster, Kristen L.
- Venue
- School Psychology Review
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2008-12-01
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 550-566
- ISSN
- 0279-6015 (ISSN-L)
- 2372-966X
- OpenAlex
- W221205877
- Cited by
- 79
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 20.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- School Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Keywords
- written expression assessment, technical adequacy, criterion validity, alternate form reliability, scoring methods, narrative writing, expository writing, picture writing, growth monitoring, junior high school students, writing assessment
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
