Despite general agreement that we should routinely assess the student performance outcomes of instruction. general agreement regarding how this should be done does not exist. Commercially distributed achievement tests are not always congruent with curriculum objectives and teachers tend not to value the information obtained from them. Informal observation of performance is the approach used and preferred by teachers. Unfortunately, the reliability and validity of teachers' informal observation of student academic performance is unknown. An emerging alternative to commercial standardized tests and to informal observations is curriculum-based measurement (CBM) that combines the advantages of both. Through standardizing observation of performance in the curriculum. CBM generates reliable data that is valid with respect to widely used indicators of achievement such as achievement test scores, age, program placement. and teachers' judgments of competence. These data are now being used to make screening. referral.IEP planning, pupil progress, and program outcome decisions. This article provides background on and illustrations of the use of CBM in special education.

This study examined the common and distinct contributions of context-free and context reading skill to reading comprehension and the contributions of context-free reading skill and reading comprehension to context fluency. The 113 4th-grade participants were measured in reading comprehension, read aloud a folktale, and read aloud the folktale's words in a random list. Fluency was scaled as speed (words read correctly in 1 min) and time (seconds per correct word). Relative to list fluency, context fluency was a stronger predictor of comprehension. List fluency and comprehension each uniquely predicted context fluency, but their relative contributions depended on how fluency was scaled (time or speed). Results support the conclusion that word level processes contribute relatively more to fluency at lower levels while comprehension contributes relatively more at higher levels.

Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is an approach for assessing the growth of students in basic skills that originated uniquely in special education. A substantial research literature has developed to demonstrate that CBM can be used effectively to gather student performance data to support a wide range of educational decisions. Those decisions include screening to identify, evaluating prereferral interventions, determining eligibility for and placement in remedial and special education programs, formatively evaluating instruction, and evaluating reintegration and inclusion of students in mainstream programs. Beyond those fundamental uses of CBM, recent research has been conducted on using CBM to predict success in high-stakes assessment, to measure growth in content areas in secondary school programs, and to assess growth in early childhood programs. In this article, best practices in CBM are described and empirical support for those practices is identified. Illustrations of the successful uses of CBM to improve educational decision making are provided.

In this article, we delineate essential commonalities and distinctions between two approaches to measurement for instructional decision making. Specific subskill mastery measurement is explained using a case study, and salient features of this predominant model are described. Then, a major contrasting approach, the general outcome measurement model, is explained; a curriculum-based measurement case study is provided to illustrate general outcome measurement; and the essential features of this alternative model are reviewed. Finally, we describe how general outcome measurement represents an innovative approach to assessment by bridging traditional and contemporary paradigms.