Cited by 52Writing and Handwriting EducationBehavioral and Psychological StudiesEducational Assessment and Pedagogy

Progress Monitoring with Objective Measures of Writing Performance for Students with Mild Disabilities

Parker, Richard I., Tindal, Gerald, Hasbrouck, Jan·1991·Exceptional Children

Abstract

To adequately monitor progress in writing, a test must show stability and demonstrate a performance profile over time that parallels those of accepted criterion measures. This study investigated the technical adequacy of seven objective indexes of writing quality in monitoring the progress of 36 middle school (Grades 6–8) students with mild disabilities over a 6-month period. The stability of each index was assessed. Holistic ratings of the same writing samples and the Test of Written Language served as validation criteria. Three indexes were moderately correlated with holistic ratings, but were not sufficiently stable over time. Direct, objective writing assessment must he used with caution for progress monitoring, given our present lack of precision in measuring the complex task of writing.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/001440299105800106

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Parker, R. I., Tindal, G., & Hasbrouck, J.
Affiliations
University of Oregon (US)
Venue
Exceptional Children
Published
1991-09
Volume
58
Issue
1
Pages
61-73
ISSN
  • 0014-4029 (ISSN-L)
  • 2163-5560
OpenAlex
W1788870187
Cited by
52
References
39
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 6
FWCI
9.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Exceptional Children (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
Keywords
progress monitoring, writing assessment, mildly handicapped students, test-retest stability, holistic rating, junior high school students
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Female, Humans, Learning Disabilities, Male, Writing

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