Creating a Progress-Monitoring System in Reading for Middle-School Students: Tracking Progress Toward Meeting High-Stakes Standards
Abstract
In this study, we examined the reliability and validity of curriculum-based measures (CBM) in reading for indexing the performance of secondary-school students. Participants were 236 eighth-grade students (134 females and 102 males) in the classrooms of 17 English teachers. Students completed 1-, 2-, and 3-minute reading aloud and 2-, 3-, and 4-minute maze selection tasks. The relation between performance on the CBMs and the state reading test were examined. Results revealed that both reading aloud and maze selection were reliable and valid predictors of performance on the state standards tests, with validity coefficients above .70. An exploratory follow-up study was conducted in which the growth curves produced by the reading-aloud and maze-selection measures were compared for a subset of 31 students from the original study. For these 31 students, maze selection reflected change over time whereas reading aloud did not. This pattern of results was found for both lower- and higher-performing students. Results suggest that it is important to consider both performance and progress when examining the technical adequacy of CBMs. Implications for the use of measures with secondary-level students for progress monitoring are discussed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cites
Small sample inference for fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood
Kenward, M. G., & Roger, J. H. (1997) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533558 · Cited by 4,552 · see citing works
Espin, C. A., & Deno, S. L. (1993) · The Journal of Special Education · doi:10.1177/002246699302700304 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
van den Bosch, R. M., Espin, C. A., Chung, S., & Saab, N. (2017) · Learning Disabilities Research & Practice · doi:10.1111/ldrp.12122 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Self-citationCurriculum-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
Data-Based Decision Making for Struggling Readers in the Secondary Grades
Filderman, M. J., Austin, C. R., & Toste, J. R. (2019) · Intervention in School and Clinic · doi:10.1177/1053451219832991 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Reed, D. K. (2015) · RMLE Online · doi:10.1080/19404476.2015.11462119 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- Espin, C., Wallace, T., Lembke, E., Campbell, H., & Long, J. D.
- Affiliations
- University of Minnesota (US)
- Corresponding author
- Espin, Christine
- Venue
- Learning Disabilities Research & Practice
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2010-05
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 60-75
- ISSN
- 0938-8982 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5826
- OpenAlex
- W2033354758
- Cited by
- 83
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 15.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Learning Disabilities Research and Practice (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Educational Assessment and Improvement
- Keywords
- progress monitoring, curriculum-based measurement, reading assessment, junior high school students, eighth grade students, reading aloud, test-retest reliability, validity, growth curves, secondary education
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