Countable indices of writing quality: Their suitability for screening‐eligibility decisions
Abstract
We examined five countable indices of writing quality for suitability in making special education screening‐eligibility decisions, collecting writing samples for 2,160 students in Grades 2 to 11 from two school districts. We examined the sensitivity of the writing indices around potential screening cutoff points on histograms and percentile line graphs with 68% standard error bands. In addition, we assessed criterion validity within each grade level by correlating the writing indices with teachers' holistic judgments of writing quality. Of the five indices, the percentage of words spelled correctly in a 3‐minute writing sample showed greatest measurement sensitivity for screening applications. If Grade 2 were excluded, the percentage of correct word sequences could be recommended as an alternative scoring method. Large standard errors of measurement, however, indicated the need for caution in interpreting score differences. Because we could not reliably differentiate scores 30 to 40 percentile points apart, grouping students from screening results may result in an unacceptable number of false‐positives and false‐negatives.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Oral reading fluency may be more sensitive to monitoring progress than nonsense word fluency.
“In the end, oral reading fluency may be more sensitive to monitoring progress than nonsense word fluency [96,120].”
From Curriculum-Based Measurement: A Brief History of Nearly Everything from the 1970s to the Present (2013) · cites this paper as [120]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Technical Features of Curriculum-Based Measurement in Writing: A Literature Review
McMaster, K., & Espin, C. (2007) · The Journal of Special Education · doi:10.1177/00224669070410020301 · Cited by 231 · see citing works
Identifying Indicators of Written Expression Proficiency for Middle School Students
Espin, C., Shin, J., Deno, S. L., Skare, S., Robinson, S., & Benner, B. (2000) · The Journal of Special Education · doi:10.1177/002246690003400303 · Cited by 142 · see citing works
Espin, C. A., De La Paz, S., Scierka, B. J., & Roelofs, L. (2005) · The Journal of Special Education · doi:10.1177/00224669050380040201 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
Espin, C., Wallace, T., Campbell, H., Lembke, E. S., Long, J. D., & Ticha, R. (2008) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/001440290807400203 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Curriculum-based measures of writing across grade levels
Weissenburger, J. W., & Espin, C. A. (2005) · Journal of School Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2005.03.002 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Curriculum-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 · see citing works
Self-citationCRITERION-RELATED VALIDITY OF CURRICULUM-BASED MEASURES IN WRITING FOR SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS
Espin, C. A. (1999) · Reading & Writing Quarterly · doi:10.1080/105735699278279 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
The Predictive Validity of CBM Writing Indices for Eighth-Grade Students
Amato, J. M., & Watkins, M. W. (2011) · The Journal of Special Education · doi:10.1177/0022466909333516 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Curriculum-Based Measures of Writing for High School Students
Diercks-Gransee, B., Weissenburger, J. W., Johnson, C. L., & Christensen, P. (2009) · Remedial and Special Education · doi:10.1177/0741932508324398 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
- Authors
- Parker, R., Tindal, G., & Hasbrouck, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Oregon (US)
- ORCID
- Tindal, Gerald
- Venue
- Exceptionality
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1991-01
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-17
- ISSN
- 0936-2835 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7035
- OpenAlex
- W2019284651
- Cited by
- 71
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Exceptionality (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
- Keywords
- writing quality, spelling accuracy, criterion validity, standard error of measurement, false positives and false negatives, writing samples, students with disabilities
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