The amount of research evaluating the technical merits of general outcome measures of science and social studies achievement is growing. This study targeted criterion validity for critical content monitoring. Questions addressed the concurrent criterion validity of alternate presentation formats of critical content monitoring and the measure's predictive validity. Participants were fifth-grade students (N = 51) who completed five different forms of critical content monitoring probes as well as oral reading fluency and maze probes over three benchmarking periods. Criterion measures were the science and social studies subtests of the online abbreviated Stanford Achievement Test-10th edition. Concurrent correlation magnitudes for critical content monitoring ranged from .47 to .60. Predictive correlations for fall and winter ranged from .23 to .64. In three of four cases, commonality analyses findings favored critical content monitoring over oral reading fluency and maze as benchmarking choices. Study limitations and benchmark assessment framework implications are discussed.
The purpose of the research was to replicate commonality analysis for two measures: critical content monitoring and sentence verification technique. Participants were 967 fourth-, fifth-, and sixth-grade students across seven public primary schools in a southeastern U.S. district. The predictor variables were administered as benchmarks 3 times in an academic year. Predictor scores were compared with science content test and reading comprehension scores from the Stanford Achievement Test–Tenth Edition abbreviated online form and a statewide accountability test. Commonality analysis results indicated that scores from both critical content monitoring and sentence verification technique added unique variance to explanatory models, replicating previous findings. In most cases, critical content monitoring scores provided the greatest percentage of unique and common variance to model explanations.
An evaluation of increased response effort to dispose of items was conducted to improve recycling at a university. Signs prompting individuals to recycle and notifying them of the location of trash and recycling receptacles were posted in each phase. During the intervention, trashcans were removed from the classrooms, and one large trashcan was available in the hallway next to the recycling receptacles. Results showed that correct recycling increased, and trash left in classrooms increased initially during the second intervention phase before returning to baseline levels.
AnotacijaŠis tyrimas papildo tyrimo validavimo rezultatus, gautus atlikus dalyko mokymosi struktūruotą formuojamąjį vertinimą, kuris buvo vykdomas internetu. Tyrimas kartu vertino ir galimybę įtraukti papildomus kintamuosius, tokius kaip teksto suvokimo pažymint teisingus ar klaidingus teiginius metodą bei rašytinį atpasakojimą, tam, kad būtų galima paaiškinti mokinių pasiekimų skirtumus gamtos pažinimo ir socialinių mokslų srityse. Tyrime dalyvavo penktos klasės mokiniai (N = 51), lankantys valstybinę pradinę mokyklą pietrytinėje JAV dalyje. Trys kintamieji -prediktoriai (t. y. turinio suvokimas, klaidingų ar teisingų teiginių žymėjimo metodas ir rašytinis atpasakojimas) koreliavo su testo rezultatais, gautais atlikus nacionalinį reprezentuojamąjį standartizuotą pasiekimų testą (Stanfordo pasiekimų testo dešimtoji sutrumpinta internetinė versija) ir valstijos atsiskaitomąjį testą. Pirsono (Pearson) koreliacija tarp turinio suvokimo ir Stanfordo gamtos pažinimo (r = ,55) ir socialinių mokslų (r = ,63) sričių testų buvo vidu-
Co-teaching is an instructional delivery system in which two or more professionals deliver substantive instruction to a diverse group of students in the general education classroom (L. Cook & Friend, 1995). In the best circumstance, it involves a general educator and special educator flexibly and deliberately accommodating the needs of students with and without disabilities together (Friend, Cook, Hurley-Chamberlain, & Shamberger, 2010; Zigmond, Magiera, Simmons, & Volonino, 2013). Co-teaching likely impacts students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) as now more than ever they receive substantial instructional time in the general education setting. In this article, we follow the hypothetical journey of a young middle school teacher thrust into a situation in which co-teaching becomes her reality. We track the journey of a new teacher, Ms. Wilson, during her early experiences with co-teaching, through struggles and successes in navigating the instructional delivery framework. We also highlight research-based practices that can be implemented with students diagnosed with EBD when co-teaching. Co-teaching Context and Research It is important to acknowledge that, quite likely, students with EBD, particularly secondary students, are receiving some form of co-teaching. We make that assertion because more students verified with emotional disturbance (as well as students with disabilities in general) are being served in the general education classroom for the majority of the school day. McLeskey, Landers, Williamson, and Hoppey (2012) reported that general education placement rates for students with emotional disturbance more than doubled between 1990 and 2007, increasing from 152 students per 1,000 to 312 students per 1,000, a growth that was higher than the overall 93% increase in general education placement rates for all students with disabilities during that time span. Mooney, Ryan, Gunter, and Denny (2012) reported that the proportion of students with emotional disturbance in the general education setting 80% or more of the time increased steadily from 25% in 1998 to 35% in 2005. That proportion stood at 44.1% for the 2011-2012 school year, with data indicating that 40% of individual states reported proportions of 50% placement and above for this group (U.S. Department of Education, 2014). In short, in today's schools, inclusion of students with EBD is both likely and widespread. Secondary-age students with EBD are also demonstrating greater success in school settings. The proportion of students with emotional disturbance who graduated high school with a regular diploma reached 51.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.